PDA

View Full Version : Houdini Engine. This could be interesting for Lightwave...



Netvudu
07-11-2013, 11:17 AM
Rob Powers and the Lightwave group should take a look into this and maybe chat for a while with SESI people.

http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option=com_forum&Itemid=172&page=viewtopic&t=29107

zarti
07-11-2013, 12:30 PM
Rob Powers and the Lightwave group should take a look into this and maybe chat for a while with SESI people.

http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option=com_forum&Itemid=172&page=viewtopic&t=29107

absolutely agree , and i consider it a great opportunity .

for me personally ( which mostly work with Houdini Escape since core-fall and open LW occasionally for old scenes ) that wd be great .

but i assume a lot great benefits in so many levels wd be ahead .

hou 's nodal approach and digital-assets are fantastic ! and now this 'plug-engine' .. wow !

interesting times .

hope to read something more than promising from LW3DG ..





.cheers

chikega
07-11-2013, 02:09 PM
Houdini essentially becomes the most powerful plugin for DCC :)

roctavian
07-11-2013, 03:46 PM
Rob Powers and the Lightwave group should take a look into this and maybe chat for a while with SESI people.

http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option=com_forum&Itemid=172&page=viewtopic&t=29107
.

Thanks for the link.:thumbsup:

Impressive approach. Very smart and very tempting for the non-Houdini end users.
In the worse case scenario, if Newtek will not do it, a 3rd party developer will make it into a commercial plugin. Too much potential there not to be used accordingly.
Ideally, Newtek will have a very close relationship with SideFX and will make this Houdini `Plug-Engine` work both ways so that you can incorporate and bring back in Houdini some of the Lightwave specific features (if SideFx have such intentions, of course).
IMHO, no matter the Lightwave future development, this is a very interesting approach and if Newtek will not do it themselves it`ll be a serious miss for lightwavers.

probiner
07-11-2013, 03:58 PM
Cool, a second glass-box environment to power up. Fabric Engine has competition!!! And deserved, since Houdini was doing it all along, just only for itself.

Cheers

hrgiger
07-11-2013, 03:59 PM
There's already Fabric Engine they should look into which I'd rather see. http://fabricengine.com/

roctavian
07-11-2013, 05:09 PM
There's already Fabric Engine they should look into which I'd rather see. http://fabricengine.com/

Sorry, Houdini first.

Tobian
07-11-2013, 05:49 PM
Hmm Houdini could well be a really useful tool, as an IO tool if nothing else! I can more likely see this as a plugin for LW than Fabric, in it's current form...

adk
07-11-2013, 08:22 PM
Very, very interesting stuff ...

SaleVonGeist
07-12-2013, 05:01 AM
Rob Powers and the Lightwave group should take a look into this and maybe chat for a while with SESI people.


Couldn't agree more, potential is amazing!

Surrealist.
07-12-2013, 06:21 AM
Houdini would be fundamentally different than Fabric I would think. But I could see the Houdini engine growing much faster as it already has a user base in studios and the Maya development is indication that it could spread very rabidly in use. Fabric on the other hand may just be too different and unfamiliar to take hold as quickly. Nothing to do with which is better.

roctavian
07-12-2013, 09:05 AM
Houdini Engine for Max?

News

Posted Thu Jul 11, 2013

(Updated) Side Effects' Robert Magee has let us know that the company would like to measure how much interest there is in a Houdini Engine for 3DS Max integration plugin. Would you be interested in seeing such a development? Please leave your comments at the end of this post.

Side Effects announced Houdini Engine, a compact API that extracts Houdini's core technologies into a procedural engine which allows for integration of Houdini technology into 3D applications.

.................................................. ......................




Link: http://www.maxunderground.com/archives/19279_houdini_engine_announced.html

Maybe starting a new thread with a pool to see if there`s any interest here would make sense?

ianr
07-12-2013, 10:13 AM
NOW YOUR TALKIN'

Bombard LW3D group on this

jasonwestmas
07-12-2013, 11:53 AM
Either fabric or houdini support would be great. Personally I like character/creature stuff and fabric appears to be focusing on that more.

probiner
07-12-2013, 12:48 PM
Houdini would be fundamentally different than Fabric I would think. But I could see the Houdini engine growing much faster as it already has a user base in studios and the Maya development is indication that it could spread very rabidly in use. Fabric on the other hand may just be too different and unfamiliar to take hold as quickly. Nothing to do with which is better.

This is how I see it. Houdini is already established. Uses Python which as a lot of learning support on the web and at some point you might just want to go full Houdini.
Fabric seems to be able to focus and have more freendom on being 3rd-party itself and not a repackage, and also multi-threading unlike Houdini, I believe is not, because precisely of Python.

Cheers

jasonwestmas
07-12-2013, 01:02 PM
I think the GPU support that Fabric has makes it most appealing to me for dynamic feedback and animated "object" properties. Based on the videos it would appear that high performance GPU support is what makes Fabric shine. (obviously)

AbstractTech3D
07-12-2013, 08:05 PM
Developments like both of these (Houdini & Fabric Engine) must make it a challenge to stay on the ball for developers of LW and Maya etc… with the need to keep development plans dynamic so as to include interfaces for/with these tools and others that might emerge. It must make having a linear 5 year development plan quite difficult to do.

Such 'inclusions' might be more significant (for a particular release) to end users than other in-house new software feature introductions. That might even be a little embarrassing!

It will, one way or another drive significant innovation and changes in our toolsets.

As has been stated before, it perhaps represents an opportunity for LW to be a cost competitive interface into using these tools (compared to Maya, for example).

dsol
07-13-2013, 06:02 AM
Houdini is very cool. Love that non-destructive workflow. And the way you can package up scenes as "digital assets" is almost exactly the same as the "encapsulation" concept I talked about yonks ago when CORE was under development (so referenced scenes could have OO-like public and private controls/variables).

I'd love to get into Houdini. The only thing really putting me off is the price ($3.5k for the full package - the basic version lacks all the fun stuff!), but more than that - the onerous subscription policy (if you don't pay for maintenance, you don't get upgrades - and have to pay FULL PRICE to buy the latest version)

dulo
07-13-2013, 06:51 AM
Some procedural workflow would be a great enhancement to lightwave. I already work a lot in houdini, but for surfacing and rendering we still use lightwave. Surfacing is really tedious in houdini. So lets hope we get a plugin ..

KurtF
07-13-2013, 11:55 AM
$3.5k for the full package

Used to be over $7K.

cagey5
07-13-2013, 12:58 PM
I've not really had to to see much more than the headlines, but could this be bundled into a totally none 3D environment like Photoshop or similar?

probiner
07-13-2013, 01:34 PM
Photoshop has a 3D environment. Zing :D

dsol
07-13-2013, 02:46 PM
Used to be over $7K.

I know. It's the upgrade policy that really sucks though.

hrgiger
07-13-2013, 02:51 PM
Yeah, wish Houdini had a non-professional version (and I'm not talking about the watered down learning version without half the stuff I would want to turn to Houdini for).

probiner
07-13-2013, 04:07 PM
What's so bad about Apprentice? Are you going to make professional work and profit with it or not?

I understand this will atract many content artists to Houdini since their work will be available "everywhere" with still a great level of flexibility to the client. Therefore I don't think SideFX would create this market for their full license holders and than just make a cheaper edition themselves. Well, maybe if there's so much demand for such edition they might do it, but still...

Let's wait and see if there's a "starving artist edition" :D

dsol
07-13-2013, 04:39 PM
What's so bad about Apprentice? Are you going to make professional work and profit with it or not?

I understand this will atract many content artists to Houdini since their work will be available "everywhere" with still a great level of flexibility to the client. Therefore I don't think SideFX would create this market for their full license holders and than just make a cheaper edition themselves. Well, maybe if there's so much demand for such edition they might do it, but still...

Let's wait and see if there's a "starving artist edition" :D

The future is "prosumer" though. They really need to recognise that, and realise that there's more money to be made selling awesome software at < $999 to a huge market than $3500 to a niche. As nicely summed up in this link: http://www.allenpike.com/2013/maximum-viable-products/

probiner
07-13-2013, 06:58 PM
We don't know that :D Maybe they are more comfortable focusing development on the feedback needs and tasks of that niche that can afford it and will take it further, than go full blown from bottom to top and have a flood clients' requests from all parallel markets trying to push Houdini their way. I'm probably wrong, yes...

Seems clearer to me, from what I have seen that Fabric brings the building tools to the environment you are working on, while Houdini is just the solver of what was set on the asset. You can't edit the code or node flow in the host app, just play around with the exposed parameters and have the solver showing the results. Which for many, many end users it is preferable since they just want a "toy" done for them. But for those people wanting to actually make the "toy" themselves Fabric seems the way to go, if you want to stick in your environment while having full control. Now curious about Fabric assets portability, since Houdini's seems to be seamless. Probably wrong again :P

Cheers

realgray
07-14-2013, 01:12 AM
There seems to be a poll on the Houdini forums about future plugins for other software.
http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option=com_forum&Itemid=172&page=viewtopic&t=29122

pinkmouse
07-14-2013, 02:18 AM
Interesting stuff. I've looked at Houdini before, but not come across Fabric Engine. Looks to me though like they are two completely different things. A Houdini plug in would add some of the cool procedural/VFX stuff to LW, but FE looks more like the kind of thing you would use to build a new LW from completely from scratch, (CORE? :D), to add all those nice multi-threaded GPU/CPU tools and suchlike.

Frankly, I'd be happy with either. Though affording to actually buy either may be a completely different thing.

prometheus
07-14-2013, 06:23 AM
definitly look in to this, so I can work on my houdini cloudFX and mix within Lightwave:) if possible that is.

Awesome stuff sideFX are doing.

Netvudu
07-14-2013, 11:25 AM
Yeah, wish Houdini had a non-professional version (and I'm not talking about the watered down learning version without half the stuff I would want to turn to Houdini for).

uh? if for non-professional version you mean something for non-commercial projects but reacheable price, then Iīm afraid you are misinformed. At home I use the ApprenticeHD, which for a mere 90$ gives me access to 99% of the software features, up to HD1080 resolution for animations and non-limited resolution for stills, and unlimited upgrades for a year, which in the case of Houdini means around 360 updates (in the insane case I wanted to update so often)

probiner
07-14-2013, 05:11 PM
Oh right.... they even call it starving artist edition :D
http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1002

So you can't use it commercially, the scene file is different from the commercial licensed one, and there are render size restrictions for animation. What about those digital assets that you create, can they feed Houdini Engine without restrictions?

For anyone interested in the digital assets thing in this I replicated this vid with houdini apprentice and it was interesting: http://download.sidefx.com/images/stories/blogs/houdini9_blog/NodeWorkflow/procedural_forest.mov

Cheers

hrgiger
07-14-2013, 07:30 PM
uh? if for non-professional version you mean something for non-commercial projects but reacheable price, then Iīm afraid you are misinformed. At home I use the ApprenticeHD, which for a mere 90$ gives me access to 99% of the software features, up to HD1080 resolution for animations and non-limited resolution for stills, and unlimited upgrades for a year, which in the case of Houdini means around 360 updates (in the insane case I wanted to update so often)

Ok, well did they change it to be full featured then? Because I remember looking at Apprentice sometime ago and thought it didn't include the particles and dynamics?

jasonwestmas
07-14-2013, 08:23 PM
The learning editions include all the dynamics and particles etc. now.

http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=589&Itemid=221

hrgiger
07-14-2013, 08:28 PM
Yeah, I saw that Jason. I just thought those weren't included previously.

jasonwestmas
07-15-2013, 08:59 AM
Yeah, I saw that Jason. I just thought those weren't included previously.

yer right, they weren't included before, you aren't imagining things.

hrgiger
07-15-2013, 09:07 AM
interesting. well i may have to have another look at Houdini then.

GandB
07-15-2013, 09:50 AM
I see that poll mentioned doesn't support Lightwave in any way: http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option=com_forum&Itemid=172&page=viewtopic&t=29122&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=

Netvudu
07-15-2013, 10:12 AM
Ok, well did they change it to be full featured then? Because I remember looking at Apprentice sometime ago and thought it didn't include the particles and dynamics?

Actually, sorry for the disagreement but the Apprentice version always included dynamics and particles. You probably got confused by the old "Houdini Escape" (now just called Houdini..as opposed to the full version called HoudiniFX) which was the 2K $ commercial version with no particles or dynamics. It still exists, but this has nothing to do with the Apprentice version.
I know all this because Iīve been an Apprentice user at home since...well, since the first Apprentice ever appeared. :p

hrgiger
07-15-2013, 11:57 AM
Actually, sorry for the disagreement but the Apprentice version always included dynamics and particles. You probably got confused by the old "Houdini Escape" (now just called Houdini..as opposed to the full version called HoudiniFX) which was the 2K $ commercial version with no particles or dynamics. It still exists, but this has nothing to do with the Apprentice version.
I know all this because Iīve been an Apprentice user at home since...well, since the first Apprentice ever appeared. :p

hey no problem, thanks for the info.

pooby
07-16-2013, 05:21 PM
https://vimeo.com/70423041

Interesting performance comparison between Fabric and Houdini

jasonwestmas
07-16-2013, 06:02 PM
https://vimeo.com/70423041

Interesting performance comparison between Fabric and Houdini

yeah that is interesting, nice fabric frame rates.

Tobian
07-16-2013, 06:08 PM
Very impressive frame rates etc, but dare I say it, that looks MORE complicated than Houdini! Might be a 'simple' language, compared to C, but man, this is the difference between Nodes and programming, and it's pretty huge!

In terms of the muliti-threaded loading and display performance though, it's excellent!

faulknermano
07-16-2013, 06:56 PM
There's already Fabric Engine they should look into which I'd rather see. http://fabricengine.com/

Why?


As it is Houdini requires some scripting, but this alleviated by the way tools/assets are designed, giving you that programmatic/procedural workflow with minimal coding. Fabric Engine is more concentrated on streamlining performance, and from that it seems to require the user more coding time.

Tobian
07-16-2013, 07:08 PM
I guess if this is simply a demo of what it's capable of then it's pretty cool. Maybe, if they integrate it more with node-graph tools, then yeah, it would be very powerful, with the option for real-time-performance script execution. It's very early days for Fabric, and hard to see the potential for the geeking out at it's performance :D

Netvudu
07-17-2013, 01:37 AM
Iīm more elegant than Fabric Engine guys, so I wonīt comment on how much of a cheap shot this "comparison" really is. Time will tell. Just let me say itīs far from a fair one.
It does tell me a lot about Fabric Engine morals, and how not to trust them ever.

faulknermano
07-17-2013, 01:45 AM
Iīm more elegant than Fabric Engine guys, so I wonīt comment on how much of a cheap shot this "comparison" really is. Time will tell. Just let me say itīs far from a fair one.
It does tell me a lot about Fabric Engine morals, and how not to trust them ever.

I was thinking the same thing....

AbstractTech3D
07-17-2013, 03:12 AM
The comparison seems adequate enough to me to demonstrate a significant performance difference at least.

I really want to see Fabric in LW. The LW engine crawls with extensive nodally driven displacements. If Fabric addresses that, and Houdini doesn't…

As you say, time will tell.

50one
07-17-2013, 03:26 AM
While you guys are debating here how good would it be to have the Houdini engine inside Lightwave, LW is not even mentioned in that poll on Houdini forum. I would like to see something like this within LW, but I think there is a big chance that LW would struggle with higher polygon counts, although that's me speaking from non-programmer point of view, so no idea how this thing works and well it can be handled within LW environment...few days left to Siggeaph, can't wait to see what the guys been up to....

Simon

Netvudu
07-17-2013, 04:42 AM
The comparison seems adequate enough to me to demonstrate a significant performance difference at least.

I really want to see Fabric in LW. The LW engine crawls with extensive nodally driven displacements. If Fabric addresses that, and Houdini doesn't…

As you say, time will tell.

That would only be true if both engines were doing the same thing, which they are not. The houdini asset is doing way more things, and obviously is much slower, but Fabric Engine guys doesnīt want you to know that, of course.

But we agree, time will tell

pooby
07-17-2013, 05:00 AM
I'm not disagreeing as I have no idea what the extra Houdini asset is doing. It would be useful to know what extra things is it doing to cause it to be so slow in comparison. Do you know?

Netvudu
07-17-2013, 05:22 AM
well, the video has gone private so I will be wary about commenting anymore, as the guys from Fabric Engine might have realise about their mistake, but I can tell you the fence asset shown isnīt simply copying, but meshing the geometry, so there were booleans, smooth and whole plaetora of things beyond copying at work there.
Also, Side Effects commented on their initial video that it was a tech preview and performance wasnīt worked yet, so even if Houdini engine being procedural and allowing for it to the user might end up being slower, they still havenīt even tried to make it fast, for starters.

Tobian
07-17-2013, 05:29 AM
I think that what this showcases is how optimised the display and loading of creation splice is, but it doesn't showcase how 'easy' it is to use. The live script execution is VERY powerful, but not terribly user friendly, though I am sure it'll go down well with the Maya MEL crowd. If it's faster to write your own, then it's faster... It was a bit of a cheap shot against Houdini, but then after Houdini's little launch stunt, I can't say I blame them: There's blood in the water, and the sharks are circling :) I don't think what the Houdini asset was doing was any more or less complicated, the difference was the guy had wrote a plugin to do the same thing. The whole point about nodal procedurality is you don't have to write code, just apply a chain of operators. If you did the same thing in LW, it would be fairly slow too, because OGL performance is not the best, and it's not aggressively multithreaded, like CS is. It's an interesting thought, but Side FX could use CS as well, to speed up their own software, but that just noodles the brain :D

pooby
07-17-2013, 06:27 AM
Whatever the case.. Its good to have some new competition going on outside Autodesk's cosy little grip. It benefits everyone.

probiner
07-17-2013, 06:54 AM
I think it was quite obvious from the start Fabric performance would be better. No circus like that on the video was necessary. A piece of damaging marketing, smart to take it down.

The Houdini asset feels randomly "downloaded from Orbolt", it's not expanded and explained, so there's no notion of how clever it is and it's range of use that would cause the load and performance issues. And then the Fabric solution is dissected and optimized. No one's questioning Fabric performance, but this "test" was not good, hope to see more serious ones in the future. Like normally happens two ideas can be similar but have different applications.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but an Houdini Asset brings geometry, cameras and keyframes too?



Cheers

Netvudu
07-17-2013, 07:20 AM
Whatever the case.. Its good to have some new competition going on outside Autodesk's cosy little grip. It benefits everyone.

I wholeheartly agree. Unfortunately, Fabric looks very tempting as a direct competitor to SESI not to be purchased by Autodesk. I see AD buying this is in less than a year if it gets really succesful. Letīs hope Iīm wrong.

Tobian
07-17-2013, 07:41 AM
Yup good point Pedro.. Have them also load the Maya scene too :D

It's thoroughly exiting to see some competition for Autodesk, and both Fabric and Hoidini are really cool, but sadly, ultimately, it's a pair of maya plugins... So it's not exactly 'competition' just less money to Autodesk... The chances of either of these coming to LW are pretty slim. :(

hrgiger
07-17-2013, 07:42 AM
I wholeheartly agree. Unfortunately, Fabric looks very tempting as a direct competitor to SESI not to be purchased by Autodesk. I see AD buying this is in less than a year if it gets really succesful. Letīs hope Iīm wrong.

wouldnt that be surprising though? the people behind fabric are ex softimage/ICE guys. is their plan to keep making things that will eventually be bought by AD? that doesnt seem likely.

Netvudu
07-17-2013, 09:05 AM
You got a point hrgiger. On the other hand itīs different to be a Softimage dev where you get fired and thatīs about it, from receiving a millionaire offer which might be difficult to put down.

pooby
07-17-2013, 09:17 AM
I wholeheartly agree. Unfortunately, Fabric looks very tempting as a direct competitor to SESI not to be purchased by Autodesk. I see AD buying this is in less than a year if it gets really succesful. Letīs hope Iīm wrong.
Anyone with the skills can write the Fabric to LW plugin. (assuming its possible that LW code can support it) Its not something that needs to be done by them. Everything is open

As for Fabric being bought out by AD, a large contributing reason they left when AD bought Softimage, (not got laid off. Nobody in their right mind would fire Helge Mathee) was because they didnt want it to be the end of an era of making innovative software. They are passionate about Fabric and the only reason they'd sell was if it wasn't doing very well and they were forced into it.
I know the Fabric guys, but I didnt post the comparison to poo poo Houdini. I took that test at face value, but it looks like they may have been a bit hasty, and I think they are reassessing whether its unfair. I feel its to their credit that they have removed it, but I think a fair one to one comparison isn't a bad idea or underhanded. I'd for one would love to see a fair comparison to ICE, as its interesting to see how things can be sped up with a different engine.

I think Houdini would be my first choice were AD ever to stop developing Softimage, ( I certainly couldnt take a step backward (for my type of work) to something like Maya) but I'd use Fabric too as it has a wider scope (insofar as you use it to make totally standalone software to do pretty much anything you like, or attach that code to a DCC package)

Tobian
07-17-2013, 09:18 AM
That said it might not get bought by Autodesk... The Foundry are in the 3D Business, they might take an interest in integrating this into Nuke/Modo, especially, as shown, it can be used to do 2D as well as 3D... These Creation Splice engineers have a very professional setup... One wonders who paid for all of it! :)

Netvudu
07-17-2013, 09:24 AM
Anyone with the skills can write the Fabric to LW plugin. Its not something that needs to be done by them. Everything is open

As for Fabric being bought out by AD, a large contributing reason they left when AD bought Softimage, (not got laid off. Nobody in their right mind would fire Helge Mathee) was because they didnt want it to be the end of an era of making innovative software. They are passionate about Fabric and the only reason they'd sell was if it wasn't doing very well and they were forced into it.

And thatīs very good news too. I also think the more non-AD software the better for everybody, specially AD users.
Sorry about thinking these guys were laid off from the Softimage dev team. With so many previous laid-offs by AD I assumed it, but clearly I was wrong. Your story makes much more sense.
By the way, a Houdini user just posted another fence asset with more polys that moves faster than Fabric Engineīs tool...heh,heh...begun the engine war has

AbstractTech3D
07-17-2013, 03:33 PM
Anyone with the skills can write the Fabric to LW plugin. (assuming its possible that LW code can support it) Its not something that needs to be done by them. Everything is open



…somebody do it quick! In case it does get bought out by AD.

jasonwestmas
07-17-2013, 04:11 PM
By the way, a Houdini user just posted another fence asset with more polys that moves faster than Fabric Engineīs tool...heh,heh...begun the engine war has

now that's what I like to see! head to head interactive competition!

AbstractTech3D
07-17-2013, 06:00 PM
I do hope it translates into greater OGL displacement performance out of LW sometime soon.

probiner
07-18-2013, 03:35 AM
By the way, a Houdini user just posted another fence asset with more polys that moves faster than Fabric Engineīs tool...heh,heh...begun the engine war has
Yeah, expected move. Link?

Netvudu
07-18-2013, 05:43 AM
There you go

http://forums.odforce.net/index.php?/topic/18029-fabric-engine-splice-performance/page__st__12

FabricPaul
07-18-2013, 07:39 AM
Hello - just letting you know that I responded to that thread. Text below. Nothing to add really - we screwed up.

Paul


Hi guys - just got pinged about this thread. We took the video down as soon as we realized a mistake had been made - there was no mendacious behaviour on our part, just a screw up. I've contacted (through Vimeo) each person that commented on the video (I see a few of them in this thread) to explain what happened, and to explain that we'll redo the comparison after Siggraph (with a Houdini TD). I'm not sure it's that constructive anyway - generally we do performance comparisons to show Application vs Application + FE, as the goal is to show how we can help rather than just a performance delta. I may wait until we implement Splice for Houdini (dependent on demand) as I think that would be a better demo that showed something useful. Interested to hear thoughts on that, I know you guys have VEX already.

Anyway - my apologies for the video going out without proper research done. We were/are flat out on Siggraph preparation and cut a corner by not checking things with a Houdini specialist. I'm glad it was called out so soon as it could have turned into a really bad situation for us. It still wasn't great (I was boarding a flight to LA when I first saw the comments, and damage control on an iPhone with fat fingers isn't easy!), but it could have been a lot worse.

If you want to talk to me directly about it, you can email me at paul.doyle at fabricengine dot com (or PM me)

Thanks,

Paul

Netvudu
07-18-2013, 07:45 AM
Great correction, and pretty much on time (this is, before SIGGRAPH)

Tobian
07-18-2013, 10:34 AM
Siggraph should be really cool this year. I will have to keep an eye out for all the demo's, papers and talks!

probiner
07-18-2013, 05:27 PM
Hey Paul, nice rewire on this matter. Good for you guys.
A vs B is always helpful in terms of prospect. Some people even can afford both so it's just a matter of understanding what can be delegated to each. Certainly if both can be cooperate, all the better. Looking forward for those technical comparisons, and see what you guys have been preparing for Siggraph, exciting tech. Have a nice show.

Cheers

zarti
07-19-2013, 12:32 PM
hi Paul ,


.. but it could have been a lot worse.
yes , i agree . and to be fair ( since i saw the video and work with houdini almost every day ) there was something 'wrong' with the video even if i havent downloaded / used that digital asset .


.. . I may wait until we implement Splice for Houdini (dependent on demand) as I think that would be a better demo that showed something useful. Interested to hear thoughts on that, I know you guys have VEX already.
..imho , that wd not only be 'fair' but it wd hugely useful for a lot of people . as someone said on odForce forum too , the CA context might be interesting to be explored by FE in Hou-Land . we as users always are open to innovations which make our jobs easier and more productive .


.. we'll redo the comparison after Siggraph (with a Houdini TD). ..
i wd add also that even comparing between Houdini and another-3D-app-implementation wd be fine and very useful . do not limit your tests within a single app .


!congrats and good luck

AbstractTech3D
07-19-2013, 04:19 PM
Fabric might add significant value to Maya. It might add significant value to Houdini.

It would add immense value to LW.

pooby
07-19-2013, 04:32 PM
If it takes off, both Fabric and Houdini engine would go some way to levelling the playing field for all compatible apps. It totally makes sense to have a format across all the apps, where tools can be shared between users of different software.
I really hope someone attempts to hook either of them up to Lw. Even though I don't use LW anymore, I think it would be great for you guys and the industry as a whole.
But it will take either Newtek themselves, or a user to do it.