whalerider Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 I am interested in FX TD work, currently working on my reel. I've been wondering whether to focus just on Houdini or to include pieces created with other software (Maya for example) as well. On the one hand, the demand-supply situation favors Houdini artists, but I don't want to miss an opportunity that comes from a shop that does not use Houdini. 2 more (related) questions: 1. Also, let's say I apply for a Houdini job. Would it be a problem if my reel is not 100% Houdini? 2. If I am interested in features work (as opposed to games and commercials), should I stick to Houdini and Maya and avoid apps like Max and RealFlow? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whalerider Posted February 16, 2008 Author Share Posted February 16, 2008 I know one of the requirements for an FX TD is scripting/programming. That's fine with me since I am coming from software development background. So my question is - what is the right mix of CG and tools/scripts demos to have on my reel? A couple tools/scripts and 3-4 CG shots? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 Hey... I merged your threads because they're related. And it's easier to answer them this way . Personally I wouldn't worry too much about what software you use on your reel... Unless you're trying to get into a pipeline dev kind of role, in which case the software takes on a more critical role. A lot of FX work is replicating real world effects (smoke, dust, fluids, etc) and if your reel shows an understanding of the physics/weight of the fx you're trying to do then the specific software can be taught with no problem. My .2c anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whalerider Posted February 16, 2008 Author Share Posted February 16, 2008 Thanks, Marc. Meeting the requirements for pipeline development is easy for me (except for "at least 2-3 years film experience"), but I doubt a US shop would get me a work visa for that kind of position - it's quite easy to find someone who knows Python and has some Unix/Linux experience, imho. Plus, afaik, it's not easy to start as pipeline TD and then move to FX TD. So I would rather stick to my FX TD target. Hey... I merged your threads because they're related. And it's easier to answer them this way .Personally I wouldn't worry too much about what software you use on your reel... Unless you're trying to get into a pipeline dev kind of role, in which case the software takes on a more critical role. A lot of FX work is replicating real world effects (smoke, dust, fluids, etc) and if your reel shows an understanding of the physics/weight of the fx you're trying to do then the specific software can be taught with no problem. My .2c anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 yip, then I'd say that a reel filled with solid fx work is more important than having scripts demo'd (not sure how those would go on a reel anyway?). M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whalerider Posted February 16, 2008 Author Share Posted February 16, 2008 (edited) I see. Thx. I've seen reels on cgtalk.com where people have screen-captured their tools "in action". yip, then I'd say that a reel filled with solid fx work is more important than having scripts demo'd (not sure how those would go on a reel anyway?).M Edited February 16, 2008 by whalerider Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 bear in mind that this is only my opinion, and I'm certain other people will have different takes on the whole thing. 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.