is Houdini designed for left-brain people?

[curveU]

Hi everyone, I just saw this post on Zbrush forum and I'm just amazed how realistic they made the character. I don't mean to start another post to compare software A with software B because it's not so meaningful. I just have one question confusing me recently and want to know what other people think about it.

When ZBrush artists are working on their characters, they focus on the detail of the character and enjoy making it more and more perfect. At every moment they are thinking about shapes, colors, texture and pose. The whole process looks like a relaxation and lots of fun.

But when Houdini artists are working on their effects, most of time they are thinking about parameter adjustment, expression revisions, nodes network development, and if more advanced, some coding. The whole process is of cause very challenging, but seems not so fun and more exhausting our minds.

So I'm wondering what you feel when working on houdini. Are you always very hungry to do more calculation? Do you always have a sense of self-fulfillment just like finishing a very beautiful drawing? Or sometimes you feel exhausted and tired and want to pick up a pencil to relax for a moment? Of cause it's very exciting to work out a realistic fire, ocean wave or explosion, but I'm talking about what you feel during the process. BTW, is this the reason why houdini is hard to be accepted widely by artists due to its left-brain nature?

thanks

[sibarrick]

I think this is a very interesting question, and I imagine everyone will have a different opinion.

I started out as an art student and undertand exactly what you are talking about, time can stand still when you are drawing or painting. Now for me I get the exact same experience when I'm working in Houdini, even coding... go figure.

Maybe its not so surprising, after all Leonardo was a scientist as well as an artist, I don't think the two skills are very far apart. Both require an almost anal level of attention to detail.

The only thing that makes your head hurt is the learning process, once that is done relax and enjoy the process.... Houdini is great for this because you can make technically difficult things easily and just play with the numbers til it fulfills your artistic vision.

[anamous]

I have this pet peeve about people putting activities like coding on one hand and "artistic stuff" on another and start pointing out differences... I come from a programming background and IMHO the distinction between coding/wiring/constructing and drawing/painting/sculpting on the other isn't as big as it's made to be - just different expressions of more or less the same cerebral process.

houdini doesn't require a strong analytical background, in fact sometimes that would get in the way - overcomplicating stuff and forgetting the playful intuitive part. as with any other tool, you need to get accustomed to the way it works before your intuition starts helping your thought process (making things feel "natural"). it just so happens that every child draws at one point or another whereas not many children write down little network charts (interesting idea for a kindergarten right there..) so there's already some experience with the drawing process when we're grown up.

as soon as you have a basic sense of orientation in houdini, using it becomes second nature, sometimes you wonder when using comparable software why the heck they had to make simple stuff so complicated - and I'm sure the same applies the other way round, too. so in a way, you're designing. just like the cliche zbrush artist massages little dents and wrinkles into a cliche characters' skin using a pen, in houdini you add look and flavor to your cliche flock of butterflies using a few nodes and the middle mouse (constantly turning parameter values up and down, testing around).

anyway, enough ranting already it all boils down to preference and upbringing, not a biological left/right thing the way I see it.

cheers,

abdelkareem

Edited May 2, 2008 by anamous

[abvfx]

hehe, this is what im gonig through right now.

I agree with everything, that has already been said. I mentioned what i going through on my blog, also have a look at the recent issue of 3D World, Craig Zerouni talks abou this topic and how it effects people perception in production.

-andy

[old school]

Let's not demean the work of sculptors. Yes it may look effortless but it certainly is not.

Those amazing zbrush sculpts are done by accomplished artists. Classically trained Professionals in most cases.

Please do not elevate the tool above the art. That would be insulting the user/artist/td/whatever.

The whole process is of cause very challenging, but seems not so fun and more exhausting our minds.

Hahaha! I guess you don't hang around sculptors very much. It wouldn't be the first time that I had to clean up clay on the walls after a certain sculptor has an "off" day...

Ultimately if you don't like tackling challenging problems, I would lead you down a different career path. There is no end to the reading, learning and application of new skills if you want to be an accomplished CG Artist/TD in this industry.

[Mario Marengo]

I agree with everybody's comments.

I'd also like to point out, lest we forget, that if the camera and/or the characters in that scene had to suddenly start moving and we had to look at all those surfaces from different angles, then a veritable avalanche of left-brain activity would no doubt ensue

By saying that, I don't mean to take anything away from what is obviously a very accomplished, beautifully balanced, and evocative work of art.

As far as the implication that analytical thought is somehow less creative or relaxing or fulfilling or whatever, I have to agree with anamous: there's sometimes pure joy to be found in finally understanding the beauty, balance, and breathtaking elegance of some equation.

I've spent almost half my life doing music and quite a few years of that professionally, and in my experience, both sides of the creative coin can provide similar levels of "artistic" fulfillment.

IMHO.

[EDIT] I just saw the hires version and the camera does do a little push-in. Though I'm still convinced that a fair number of left-brain neurons were involved in the making of that piece. Inspired work!

[/EDIT]

[andrewlowell]

Hi everyone, I just saw this post on Zbrush forum and I'm just amazed how realistic they made the character. I don't mean to start another post to compare software A with software B because it's not so meaningful. I just have one question confusing me recently and want to know what other people think about it.

These types of comparisons are made on odforce more often than SESI forum lately, which is a little strange. However, I own Zbrush, and I use ZBrush for the same reason I use Houdini. It's a very good tool for taking the "work" out of certain tasks. In ZBrush's case my painting skills aren't anything to be proud (even for a dust mop) so I use it mainly for bumps / texture maps / etc that need a more exacting sense of randomness. I think it's great technology for the $ and is here to stay.

When ZBrush artists are working on their characters, they focus on the detail of the character and enjoy making it more and more perfect. At every moment they are thinking about shapes, colors, texture and pose. The whole process looks like a relaxation and lots of fun.

While this might be the target market and much of the demo work we see for ZBrush, this is a pretty narrow interpretation of the types of things ZBrush can be used for. Just like Houdini isn't just for coders and complex procedural effects, ZBrush isn't just for monsters and can be used for all sorts of things that you wouldn't necessarily liken to CG character art

But when Houdini artists are working on their effects, most of time they are thinking about parameter adjustment, expression revisions, nodes network development, and if more advanced, some coding. The whole process is of cause very challenging, but seems not so fun and more exhausting our minds.

This normally means the effect isn't working, or you are tired, or you are using the tool incorrectly. Same thing happens with all types of expressive mediums. The second you are thinking more about the tool you are using than the results you are getting it becomes very unpleasant. Houdini has a learning curve just like ZBrush, or sculpting for that matter. The idea is to get beyond the tool and form the closest relationship possible between you and the end result.

So I'm wondering what you feel when working on houdini. Are you always very hungry to do more calculation? Do you always have a sense of self-fulfillment just like finishing a very beautiful drawing? Or sometimes you feel exhausted and tired and want to pick up a pencil to relax for a moment? Of cause it's very exciting to work out a realistic fire, ocean wave or explosion, but I'm talking about what you feel during the process.

I hate doing "calculation" and I'm terrible with arithmetic. Houdini is much more than a calculator, it's more of a language .. so in this way it thinks so you don't have to. However, I'm feeling a little guilty as charged here. I feel more fulfillment when I get 1000 characters in a crowd to move the exact way to impart a sense of realism than I ever would with picking up a pencil and drawing. I can't draw a strait line to save my life and the few times I've tried I quickly feel like you feel with the exhausted mind .. which is why I like vectors

BTW, is this the reason why Houdini is hard to be accepted widely by artists due to its left-brain nature?

Which artists have you been talkin' to?

Edited May 3, 2008 by andrewlowell

[curveU]

Thanks all for your comment. I'm not so experienced and maybe I have some misunderstanding about computer art. So I'm very glad to see experienced people like old school and Mario talking about it. I'm always on Houdini side but I just get a little confused with the situation recently.That's why I started this topic, so don't get me wrong with someone who is against with Houdini...

I mentioned what i going through on my blog, also have a look at the recent issue of 3D World, Craig Zerouni talks abou this topic and how it effects people perception in production.

-andy

hi andy, what did craig say about this? I'm in LA and it takes too long to get the latest issue.

Let's not demean the work of sculptors. Yes it may look effortless but it certainly is not.

Those amazing zbrush sculpts are done by accomplished artists. Classically trained Professionals in most cases.

Please do not elevate the tool above the art. That would be insulting the user/artist/td/whatever.

Ultimately if you don't like tackling challenging problems, I would lead you down a different career path. There is no end to the reading, learning and application of new skills if you want to be an accomplished CG Artist/TD in this industry.

hi old school, I don't mean to demean anything and actually I respect every sculptor. I just feel the way of working in ZBrush and in Houdini are different, and want to know what other people think about it.

there's sometimes pure joy to be found in finally understanding the beauty, balance, and breathtaking elegance of some equation.

I've spent almost half my life doing music and quite a few years of that professionally, and in my experience, both sides of the creative coin can provide similar levels of "artistic" fulfillment.

hi Mario, thanks for your share of your experience. I think I'm just on the way to the final understanding of beauty and there is a long way to go.

BTW, thanks for your presentation. It's very cool.

This normally means the effect isn't working, or you are tired, or you are using the tool incorrectly. Same thing happens with all types of expressive mediums.

hi andrew, maybe I'm wrong but I do think we need to do lots of times of adjustments before we get the perfect result. We change the frequency of noise functions, revise random seeds, or tweak several physical parameters in dynamics simulation. In the process of drawing, it requires lots of adjustments too. But I just feel working on shapes is different with working on numbers. Maybe it's just a confusion for me at this moment, and finally I will find the beauty (as Mario said...)

Which artists have you been talkin' to?

I haven't talk to many artists about this issue. I just get this conclusion from statistics, like the post numbers, forum traffic, registered users. Maybe it doesn't make much sense.

Anyway, nice weekend, everyone.

[andrewlowell]

hi andrew, maybe I'm wrong but I do think we need to do lots of times of adjustments before we get the perfect result. We change the frequency of noise functions, revise random seeds, or tweak several physical parameters in dynamics simulation.

Well, that's kind of my point. Houdini has shapes just like ZBrush has parameters that you need to adjust. In fact .. a cleverly designed digital asset in Houdini can really take the number crunching out of the process and leaves you free to make adjustments without worrying about the numbers. But yeah, last time I checked ZBrush had looots of parameters, various functions and shortcuts. I really don't see Houdini and ZBrush very differently in this aspect.

But, take a dynamics simulation for instance. If things are going well you may be adjusting a parameter (yes a number) here or there but really aren't too concerned with what the number is ... as the artist you are thinking about it more like more friction across the floor, less bounce, etc. It get's even better when you are working with bezier curves and are "sculpting" the effect, or working with particles and watch as you slight adjustments make many new variations.

ZBrush can be very intuitive when it's used for things that it's made for. But, try to model a car or house with it, or heaven forbid some sort of animation/morph and you'll be adjusting lots of numbers pretty quickly ... maybe even having to keep track of them on a piece of paper or something, and still not coming close to the result of a 3ds Max or Maya I think. Houdini could even take this sort of thing to the next level and make a city or traffic jam etc.

So, I really think this is a question of how we perceive the medium, .. and how comfortable we are with the medium .. not the medium itself. If I were you I would try to approach Houdini / Zbrush whatever with an open mind; and not designate this or that as artistic or mathematical etc. These distinctions really aren't that important anyway, what we're after is the end result that other's will see. I'm sure if you spend a little time getting to know Houdini you'll be doing cool stuff in no time, and might even think it's more artful and organic than ZBrush

Edited May 4, 2008 by andrewlowell

[curveU]

If I were you I would try to approach Houdini / Zbrush whatever with an open mind; and not designate this or that as artistic or mathematical etc. These distinctions really aren't that important anyway, what we're after is the end result that other's will see. I'm sure if you spend a little time getting to know Houdini you'll be doing cool stuff in no time, and might even think it's more artful and organic than ZBrush

Hi Andrew, I think you are right and I agree with you that an open mind is very important for learning. Perhaps it's just the high learning curve or the challenging projects I want to accomplish that make me confused at this moment.

I think some people (including me) are sort of frustrated when learning Houdini, and they may give up before they realize the artistic power of Houdini. Then they begin to complain it's so technical and convince others not to learn it at all. I can see that SideFX is working hard to change the situation, like the more user-friendly UI and more tutorials, training and HDA. Maybe When there are enough tutorials available and more complete solutions in the areas like fluids, more people will eventually move to Houdini.

Thanks for your feedback

[abvfx]

I think Houdini is becoming more accessable because of one reason, training/tutorials.

I know the 9.1 release was big on the UI. I like it, but its not what changed my decision to use it as my primary package. Because of the Help files and training/books i have resources, i have techniques i can use.

The help files are great and they do help in many ways, but sometimes there arent enough examples/scenes but now i am getting more and more used to Houdini i am getting to the point where i can look up a VOP and know how i could implement it in different settings.

But i agree that Houdini is like an effiecient artistic tools. Most of us all want to make pretty images at the end of the journey.

I will say anyone can use Houdini. ANYONE, importing a model, setting up lights, applying materials, setting up the render and there you go.

But almost everyone who wants to learn Houdini want to fully capitalize on the power within and get frustrated/overwhelmed when trying to manipulate so much data.

My take.

-andy