Houdini 12 Wishlist

[papicrunch]

Marc, How can I send you a private message ?

It seems that you can't receive it

Edited October 12, 2011 by papicrunch

[magneto]

Hey guys,

I was reading through these thread, although I am only on page 2, but I see people mention "full support for edges". Does Houdini not support edges? I thought you can select them, etc, but not many operations on them. So is it the lack of options or does Houdini really doesn't have a concept of edges?

Thanks.

[Leon Amion]

Hey guys,

I was reading through these thread, although I am only on page 2, but I see people mention "full support for edges". Does Houdini not support edges? I thought you can select them, etc, but not many operations on them. So is it the lack of options or does Houdini really doesn't have a concept of edges?

Thanks.

It is not implemented as a primitive type the way a point and a polygon "primitive" is so edges can not be called procedurally in many operations. However you can import geometry with edge details for normal shading in Mantra and you can work with edges while modeling in the viewport.

edit: it can be called for procedurally but not as easy as points/polys because they don't have unique numbering. An edge is defined with point numbers.

Edited November 15, 2011 by SoulVector

[magneto]

It is not implemented as a primitive type the way a point and a polygon "primitive" is so edges can not be called procedurally in many operations. However you can import geometry with edge details for normal shading in Mantra and you can work with edges while modeling in the viewport.

edit: it can be called for procedurally but not as easy as points/polys because they don't have unique numbering. An edge is defined with point numbers.

Thanks SoulVector, I didn't realize that was the way. Seems like a core change.

[LaidlawFX]

I want the UV project node to do cubic mapping like the Maya version. UV unwrap does do flat boxes, but that is good in another manner. UV project and UV texture can do a lot of primitive types except cubic... and I know between the boundary information and the UV unwrap equations this can be added to UV project, or UV texture. The biggest difference is the transform matrix on the UV project and UV Texture that make it different from UV unwrap and let you shape the uvs more easily.

[LaidlawFX]

For background images in the view-port, allow you to scale and offset the images, in the display options.

I know my alternatives are to create a grid, apply a texture to it, and move my UVs around to get something better, modify the image before hand, or use cops. I feel like if you are going to give the user the option to display an image you should give them some very basic controls to adjust the position of the image. Or maybe create a button, that automatically create a cop network with the image path in it, along side the display image.

[edward]

For background images in the view-port, allow you to scale and offset the images, in the display options.

From http://www.sidefx.co.../displayopts_3d ?

Image Offset/Image Scale

Manually control the placement and scale of the background image in the viewport. The Automatically Place Image checkbox must be off to use these options.

A scale value of 1 retains the original size of the source image. A scale value of 0.5 would reduce the source image by half.

[LaidlawFX]

From http://www.sidefx.co.../displayopts_3d ?

Thanks, that is exactly what I mentioned... complete with the Houdini logic of how it works... hmm...

Thanks again

[LaidlawFX]

In shop/vop materials I want to be able to use a for each loop / multi parm block list to layer you shaders.

I've done this in vops sops for volumes in the past, each layer cooking on the previous layer to create more and more defined shapes, and it would be cool to be able to have the same functionality in shaders, but more of a multiple mask, option. I know basic work flow in houdini is designed to go against this logic for shading, but it would allow for some more production friendly and artistically designed shaders.

[LaidlawFX]

A method to place parameters in an material interface on a shop with a typed code(or an alt interface device) on a parameter vop. The base concept would be to put it in folders and layer the parameters in an alternative method than a naming convention. Also to be consider would be adding a method for separators and labels, though the nature of how these options already exist may prove to be a problem.

This would have to co-exist with the standard method of using the operator type parameter/edit parameter interfaces. I would hope that it would be directly connected to how they are located already. Per say you move the location in the interface and it updates this string.

Also you would have to seemingly know how the interface would be built before hand(which is what I want to do), but in contrast you would need a way for this option to be able to lock out matching patterns. I think this code should be the same as the node name logic.

I think an option for this implementation would be for there to be a path like string with it's on syntax (It could match another syntax in Houdini, not sure which one). It could already be there, but just need to be revealed as the interface some how maintains it shape once moved into position through the interface.

On the mantra surface material for instance, The parameters of Enable Diffuse through Use Base Color for a string based field would follow as such;

/Surface{Folder, Tab}/Diffuse{Folder, Tab}/{1}

/Surface{Folder, Tab}/Diffuse{Folder, Tab}/{2}

/Surface{Folder, Tab}/Diffuse{Folder, Tab}/{3}

/Surface{Folder, Tab}/Diffuse{Folder, Tab}/{4}{Separator}

/Surface{Folder, Tab}/Diffuse{Folder, Tab}/{5}

[LaidlawFX]

Netboxes need to go on a diet.

They are comparable to the fat crisis in America.

When nodes are laid out upon a gird, and I apply a netbox around two of them, I don't want to feel like crowding on to a

It be nice if they were more like snuggies and covered only the places you wanted them to cover. For instance just the two nodes you selected, and not their brothers and sisters in the chain. Ok so maybe a bad example, and stretching it a little.

At least trim the bounds defining the two nodes to three quarters to a half of what they get laid out as. It's currently more like hoarders than minimalism, really.

Ok, back to work...