andreu.lucio Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Hi, I was thinking about having a sop operator were write fluxus coding for rapid prototyping of recursive functions and having its output as normal geometry. Would be very dificult to develop this in HDK using the fluxus libraries and functions? Or maybe processing ones, for a vop plugin to easily create 2d complex patterns for use inside vop networks. I´m allways trying to get ideas from other softwares and bring to houdini but this kind off rapid prototyping,(not only modifing things like vex, also creating primitives in recursive ways through coding), I found to be much easier in fluxus or processing. Similar way as having lsystem sop, wouldn´t be very handy to have a fluxus or procesing sop? And how dificult do you thing it can be to create with HDK? I´ve never done anything in HDK but just wondering about this. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macha Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Fluxus? Please somebody enlighten me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreu.lucio Posted February 4, 2011 Author Share Posted February 4, 2011 Thanks Macha, I apreciate your activity in the forum. You are always ready to answer. It´s similar to processing but with a more 3d core and even more simple coding. http://www.pawfal.org/fluxus/ Processing http://processing.org/ What I mean is to have a sop where you can write the code and "simply" get the created and animated geometry out. Or a texture in case of processing. They both have nice libraries to avail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kubabuk Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 What I mean is to have a sop where you can write the code and "simply" get the created and animated geometry out. Or a texture in case of processing. Perhaps pythonSOP can do that? I'm not quite sure what benefits would be to implement yet another scripting language. In fact for rapid prototyping SOPs + Python are enough imho. But I agree at the moment it is hard to create/modify recursively larger geometries in Houdini and the DOPs are too much processor intensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreu.lucio Posted February 4, 2011 Author Share Posted February 4, 2011 Haven´t used python sop to much, just made 2 or 3 otls and love it, but it´s quite low level or geometry level. Maybe I should try the object python sop which never tryied. I have tryied many interesting things by doing recursion with the sop solver and its really nice also, but as you said a bit slow. I thougth a simple translator wouldn´t be as much to implement(not a full implementation like python where you can do houdini stuff), similar to the program procedural that can run an external program and render the outputing geometry but in Sops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdg Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Can you give an example of what you're trying to achieve? One issue you're gonna find is: only DOPs and POPs are simulation contexts. Especially SOPs are (with some exceptions) really procedural. This obviously has pro's and con's: Like Pro: you can jump to any given frame and the SOP network will evaluate without any knowledge of it's past. Or con: once you leave a frame the SOP forgets everything it ever did. I has some varying success with using hou.session as a long term memory for pythonSOPs. Also have a look at feedbackSOP. Or put a fileSOP(write) to the end of your SOP chain and fileSOP(read) to the start. Maybe you find a way to pass GDPs to processing and back and keep the interpreter alive. Worth having a look at the houdini branch of cortex-vfx, maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreu.lucio Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 Ei Georg, thanks a lot for your answer and sorry for my delay in replying. I´m not trying to do nothing specific. I work with houdini for everything, but I have been playing with processing and fluxus and found very easy to test recursive function with objects (very simple ones) and with processing very easy to draw patterns. So think about the posibility to have the same inside houdini. All also looking for an excuse to try HDK. For having processing as a shop operator with an input for the position would be enought, so my question is about the dificulty of doing this, just to know if I wan´t to even start to try. But maybe I should look for another more usefull and easy thing to start with HDK. So what type of operations can the python object do?And the Dop object and dop solver? If I want to do recursion creating new points only with python what I should use, python dop object or python dop solver? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdg Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Sometimes I miss the "simple approach of processing" like the setup/draw structure. But then Houdini is targeted towards VFX and I can see the benefit in it's approach. I'm not really sure if I'd approve a processing sketch as a texture. As for your other questions: Houdini's help is even more sophisticated than the processing one. I'm sure you'll find tons of starting points for your experiments. I prefer SOPs - but that a personal decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
com48 Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 hey putoparri, have a look at the feedback Sop. (you'll have to proto install it because it's not normally installed by default). it gives you a sop Solver type functionality on sop level. It's notorious instable though. definitely not for "production" as one would say. greetings, Lars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreu.lucio Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 Sometimes I miss the "simple approach of processing" like the setup/draw structure.But then Houdini is targeted towards VFX and I can see the benefit in it's approach. Me too, thats why this idea come to me. I´m sure is not an everyday use tool but I would like to have it as another option. com48: Didn´t know about the feedback Sop, thanks. I found this article were digital domain used a similar method to what I was thinking. http://jtnimoy.net/workviewer.php?q=178 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edward Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 Doesn't the ForEach and TimeShift SOPs satisfy most looping needs in SOPs these days? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreu.lucio Posted April 7, 2011 Author Share Posted April 7, 2011 (edited) Most of them, but really nice details can be created with very simple networks with recursion and the sop solver is great for that but I haven´t been able to do it without being time dependent. I would be great if the foreach itself had an option to act as recursive (I mean in each step plug the result to the next step as it does the sop solver). What I mis from processing while creating patterns in vex is the object oriented programming. This may be a crazy idea but whould object oriented vex be a very powerfull way of drawing procedural patterns? Or maybe a python shop? Just wondering... Would be very nice to be able to generate this kind of paterns at render time to use for diplaces, textures... Edited April 7, 2011 by putoparri Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anim Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 ... I would be great if the foreach itself had an option to act as recursive (I mean in each step plug the result to the next step as it does the sop solver)...[/img] it works that way if you turn off Merge Results Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreu.lucio Posted April 8, 2011 Author Share Posted April 8, 2011 Thanks man! It´s true, I knew that option but I thougth it was not exactly the same, so I´ve been trying it with some scenes I did with greeble (with the sop solver) and it works exactly the same with a foreach inside a foreach. Just to be sure, they are exactly the same with the only diference of sop solver being time dependent, right? And so yes! Edward now I know it does satisfy all my needs. Thanks guys! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcos Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) I'm experimenting in a similar field Edited April 21, 2011 by Marcos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdg Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Just stumpled across this - which reminded me of this thread: Paint Processing Textures in Maya http://www.dannywynne.com/blog/?p=14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.