I have a problem with houdini: - I have to think a lot and design visual script to get a model that can be modified. Is such a powerful editor only needed to create multiple copies of the same model? And if I just need to make a model - without modifications - it is a nightmare to make this model in houdini - because I can create a model in 3ds max in much less time. Question to professionals: - what can be the benefit of having a model that can be modified?
The choice of software depends on the project's requirements and the user's comfort and proficiency with a specific tool. Each software has its strengths and weaknesses, and the primary consideration is achieving the desired results in a way that aligns with the user's workflow and preferences. Efficiency, familiarity, and the ability to meet project goals are important factors in selecting the right tool. If a single-use model suffices and another software offers a quicker workflow, it might be the optimal choice. Conversely, when projects involve iteration, changes, or the need for automation, a parametric approach in Houdini could be transformative.
@@everythingcg My conclusion is that there should be more high-level tools in houdini - like a tool that finds those edges that you can apply "bevel" to, etc.
Yes, Houdini provides more general tools that let you build personal setups for very specific needs, otherwise there would be hundreds of thousands of nodes. It's hard for Houdini to automatically know which edges the user needs beveled, but there are tools that the user can use to procedurally specify desired edges to be beveled. Also there is always an option to hand select desired edges like in most other 3D packages.
@@everythingcg youi said "Also there is always an option to hand select desired edges like in most other 3D packages." This is not in keeping with the spirit of proceduralism :) Yes - i know that if there is no any tool in houdini then you can create it yourself But it seems to me that those tools more likable to tecnical tools but art-ones
@@Staglaitor I wanted to highlight that Houdini provides the same standard poly modeling tools as any other 3D package and in addition you can create your own tools for specific use cases. If your project will not benefit from proceduralism you don't have to make it procedural and hand selecting edges is a perfectly fine method that you would use anyway in Maya or 3Ds max. You can still make it procedural if you are interested by making sure that incoming geometry has consistent topology, then hand selecting desired edges once will create an edge group that will stay consistent throughout parameter changes keeping the proceduralism intact. At the end of the day I suggest using a 3D package that you feel most comfortable with. If you feel like it would take you much longer to build something in Houdini compared to 3Ds max then it would make sense to go with 3Ds max.
agree, there is a lot of attention to detail
That's impressive
i would kill for a tutorial. this is amazing!
you can play at .25 speed...don't know if that will help ; )
I have a problem with houdini: - I have to think a lot and design visual script to get a model that can be modified. Is such a powerful editor only needed to create multiple copies of the same model? And if I just need to make a model - without modifications - it is a nightmare to make this model in houdini - because I can create a model in 3ds max in much less time. Question to professionals: - what can be the benefit of having a model that can be modified?
The choice of software depends on the project's requirements and the user's comfort and proficiency with a specific tool. Each software has its strengths and weaknesses, and the primary consideration is achieving the desired results in a way that aligns with the user's workflow and preferences.
Efficiency, familiarity, and the ability to meet project goals are important factors in selecting the right tool. If a single-use model suffices and another software offers a quicker workflow, it might be the optimal choice. Conversely, when projects involve iteration, changes, or the need for automation, a parametric approach in Houdini could be transformative.
@@everythingcg My conclusion is that there should be more high-level tools in houdini - like a tool that finds those edges that you can apply "bevel" to, etc.
Yes, Houdini provides more general tools that let you build personal setups for very specific needs, otherwise there would be hundreds of thousands of nodes. It's hard for Houdini to automatically know which edges the user needs beveled, but there are tools that the user can use to procedurally specify desired edges to be beveled. Also there is always an option to hand select desired edges like in most other 3D packages.
@@everythingcg youi said "Also there is always an option to hand select desired edges like in most other 3D packages."
This is not in keeping with the spirit of proceduralism :)
Yes - i know that if there is no any tool in houdini then you can create it yourself
But it seems to me that those tools more likable to tecnical tools but art-ones
@@Staglaitor I wanted to highlight that Houdini provides the same standard poly modeling tools as any other 3D package and in addition you can create your own tools for specific use cases. If your project will not benefit from proceduralism you don't have to make it procedural and hand selecting edges is a perfectly fine method that you would use anyway in Maya or 3Ds max. You can still make it procedural if you are interested by making sure that incoming geometry has consistent topology, then hand selecting desired edges once will create an edge group that will stay consistent throughout parameter changes keeping the proceduralism intact. At the end of the day I suggest using a 3D package that you feel most comfortable with. If you feel like it would take you much longer to build something in Houdini compared to 3Ds max then it would make sense to go with 3Ds max.