Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 02:05:31 UTC No. 822295

nice, I can finally switch to Blender and save the cost of Houdini's license

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 02:16:20 UTC No. 822296

>>822294
I'm going to actually give this a try. If I succeed, I will have procedural boobs and butts

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 02:44:58 UTC No. 822300

>>822294
Pretty neat.
It's too bad my smoothbrain can't figure out how to do more than scatter instances with it. Even then I'm still fucking confused how to mix and math attributes.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 02:57:11 UTC No. 822303

>>822294
I still think I'm gonna learn houdini just because houdini engine for ue4 (as well as everything else that goes without saying).

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:16:28 UTC No. 822310

Holy based! Houdini instantly and irrevocably made obsolete!

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 06:10:55 UTC No. 822323

>>822310
DELETE THIS

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 06:50:53 UTC No. 822328

>>822310
I mean, I respect your point and all, but how many of those were available at launch for Houdini?
The whole "Houdini BTFO" thing is fucking retarded I agree, because it'll never be, but as it is now the Geometry Nodes in Blender are kind of an initial tentative release.
It might never come close to the amount of operations you can do in Houdini, but those are operations added after years and years of iteration. Geometry Nodes have been out of all of a month-ish. It'll get added to over time.
I'm sure you can do most of just about anything you can think of in Houdini with just a handful of those operations. I doubt all of those are used extensively outside of extremely niche cases.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 08:38:54 UTC No. 822343

I see nothing that wasn't possible in Houdini almost two decades ago

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 08:54:07 UTC No. 822346

>>822310
I can only guess what half of them do. Truth is; not everyone in 3D is a TD or aspires to become one.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 09:50:21 UTC No. 822352

>>822328
Doesn't matter because SideFX is pumping out more in every release.
So Houdini will always have a 20+ years advantage over Blender.
Also you assume that a Node in Blender is equal to an Node in Houdini which isn't the case and probably never will be.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 10:28:58 UTC No. 822356

>>822352
>Doesn't matter because SideFX is pumping out more in every release.
No shit. Who knew that an active software still produces updates. News to me.

>Also you assume that a Node in Blender is equal to an Node in Houdini which isn't the case and probably never will be.
Math is math. All of those operations are just functions. There's nothing inherently better or worse about them if the math ends up at the same conclusion. Some might work faster, but all of that evens out over time to the point where saving .01s doesn't matter much.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 11:00:30 UTC No. 822363

>>822356
>All of those operations are just functions.
Right.
So why is the SubD end result in Blender different than Maya's or Houdini's?
>There's nothing inherently better or worse about them if the math ends up at the same conclusion.
That's a big IF, anon.
If you are talking about simple math, then yeah, it should be the exact same. But all the complex stuff will never be the same because these algorithms are NOT the same nor do they give the same end result.
>all of that evens out over time
Nope.
Blender will not get the same quality just because it has math nodes. You won't magically get an unified physic solver or massive performance, or great tools that are the best in its class.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 11:47:58 UTC No. 822367

Sidefx has much better nodes, well worth the $270 indie license.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:22:54 UTC No. 822372

>>822294
Can't see this even scratching Houdini's market niche anytime soon

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:37:00 UTC No. 822378

>PROCEDURAL MODELING

Why won't this meme die? You modify anything at top of a graph and all downstream nodes explode because the polygons are numbered differently, it's no different than working with history/modifiers in other programs.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:39:42 UTC No. 822379

>>822378
procedural modelling has nothing to do with vertex numbers.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:50:26 UTC No. 822381

>autistically noodling over procedural node setup for weeks
>nobody else cares

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:53:16 UTC No. 822383

>>822379
Do you mean nondestructive booleans? Been around forever in every software.
Or beveling edges by angle? Been around forever, prone to break in all apps including Houdini and requires manual cleanup.
Or copying stuff to points, maybe with a transform associated? Every software does this.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:23:28 UTC No. 822386

>>822378
>You modify anything at top of a graph and all downstream nodes explode
brainlet

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:06:00 UTC No. 822397

>>822294
you could do that in Blender years ago, this is blender 2.69
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILT2KRF0r58

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:08:09 UTC No. 822398

>>822397
Don't bother. Retards like shiny new toys and being spoon-fed.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:22:28 UTC No. 822404

>>822356
>>Doesn't matter because SideFX is pumping out more in every release.
>No shit. Who knew that an active software still produces updates. News to me.
Fair enough. But a lot of Blender apologists tend to ignore this fact, assuming that having X years of development will place it at parity with other software.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:26:14 UTC No. 822405

what I don't get is that every single person reading this thread knows the OP is a shitpost but they argue with it like it's a real post anyway.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:30:10 UTC No. 822407

>>822405
That's just how empty and meaningless our lives are.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 16:19:23 UTC No. 822428

>>822352
>a 20+ years advantage over Blender
I don't think Houdini (or any other software for that matter) had the power Blender has right now in 2001

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 18:50:32 UTC No. 822466

>>822405
Just my inner autist screaming at the world. Pray that he never gets fully out.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 18:52:03 UTC No. 822468

>>822428
>I don't think
There's your problem.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 18:57:48 UTC No. 822473

>>822383
Lol retard

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 19:01:18 UTC No. 822477

>>822328
>muh but maybe Blunder will be good for something in 50 years ago

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 19:06:36 UTC No. 822480

>>822468
>images.jpg
There's your problem, phoneposter

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 20:03:16 UTC No. 822488

>>822480
Except I didn't you fartsniffer

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 20:32:25 UTC No. 822495

>>822477
Someone lacks reading comprehension.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 20:53:00 UTC No. 822498

>>822495
No, he has a point. Blender is STILL missing core functionality and quality of life functionality that other software has had for decades. Blender's new nodes are cool and all but they'll never be fleshed out in any decent amount of time

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:01:05 UTC No. 822500

>>822488
Ok phoneposter, maybe one day you'll stop being a pleb

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:46:11 UTC No. 822524

>>822500
>moving goalposts
The eternal blendlet; so incredibly desperate.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:48:07 UTC No. 822526

>>822498
>Blender's new nodes are cool and all but they'll never be fleshed out in any decent amount of time
I kinda already said that, or at least said that Blender won't really compare to Houdini by the end. Besides, we're talking about one feature set (the nodes), not the program as a whole.

My whole point was that comparing a software that's been out for X amount of years and has been constantly iterating, and then shitting on something that just got implemented based on its lack of features is a bit ridiculous. No shit it's going to have more features if it's been doing it for so long. That's how time works. It's like shit-talking a baby because it can't pole-vault.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:53:04 UTC No. 822530

>>822526
They will be neglected now that they are out and remain poorly documented and supported. Blender was always like that. Boasting about "breakthrough features" but under-delivering. Lack of vision and long term strategy. This is why it will stay relevant compared to the big ones.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:55:24 UTC No. 822532

>>822526
They will be neglected now that they are out and remain poorly documented and supported. Blender was always like that. Boasting about "breakthrough features" but under-delivering. Lack of vision and long term strategy. This is why it will stay irrelevant compared to the big ones.

Anonymous at Thu, 29 Apr 2021 22:25:49 UTC No. 822552

saw a couple of entagma tutorials about these and it seems quite janky at the moment.
would love to see a free alternative to houdini, but not convinced it'll ever get there.

Anonymous at Fri, 30 Apr 2021 04:14:42 UTC No. 822621

>>822524
>phoneposter implies I use Blender
Pure pleb projection lmao

Anonymous at Fri, 30 Apr 2021 04:35:01 UTC No. 822627

>>822294
I still kinda don't get the appeal of "procedural" modelling
except trees I guess, trees can go fuck themselves
but buildings? why?

Anonymous at Fri, 30 Apr 2021 14:54:22 UTC No. 822708

>>822627
Because when you need to shit many assets for your open world game you want to automate it to an extend so you can iterate on it fast. For example have a tool to quickly plop a rivers/steams of water, then see how it pans out in a grander scheme of things and when you are satisfied with it dive in and manually adjust it (that you can with lets say an auto reed tool).

Some people ree here because 'no art, just click click' and others reee 'who cares I click click and get a result'. Tools are to augment, speed up and make your creation process more flexible, but not to be the creation process themselves. I think optimal scenario is creating/customizing your own tools so they give more distinct results but you still use their power.

Anonymous at Fri, 30 Apr 2021 15:45:30 UTC No. 822711

>>822621
Meds: take em

Anonymous at Fri, 30 Apr 2021 20:35:47 UTC No. 822773

>>822627
It's about doing the work of multiple people as one person. With procedural shit, all you gotta do is put some operations together and bam, you've got hundreds of "unique" building variations like the above. Something that'd be easy enough to do manually, but it'd take more time than a single click.
It's about multiplying your effort in a way.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 May 2021 15:15:16 UTC No. 822939

>>822294
beginner here, has anyone got any resource or videos they can share to start comprehending how something like that is made? I wanna try it

Anonymous at Sat, 1 May 2021 16:10:24 UTC No. 822951

>>822294
ah yes

Anonymous at Sat, 1 May 2021 16:26:20 UTC No. 822957

>>822939
Search for terms like the ones mentioned in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuNTFrDLABY

Anonymous at Wed, 12 May 2021 10:37:39 UTC No. 825456

>>822383
kek retard

Anonymous at Wed, 12 May 2021 11:52:38 UTC No. 825472

>>822294
>shitting on Houdini when every other Blender user loves Houdini
Absolute retard.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 May 2021 13:28:01 UTC No. 825486

>>825472
Now that Blender is trying to play catch-up with Houdini, that will slowly change. Year after year they'll resent Houdini more, and soon they'll hate SideFX as much as they hate Autodesk.

I foresee difficult times for new Houdini release presentations on YouTube.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 May 2021 13:49:37 UTC No. 825488

>>822352
That's what you guys said about Maya too, and now it's completely obsolete, surviving only due to a stagnant industry pipeline reliance.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 May 2021 13:53:25 UTC No. 825492

>>825488
weak bait

Anonymous at Wed, 12 May 2021 19:54:38 UTC No. 825543

>>825488
blendlets have an inferiority complex

Anonymous at Mon, 24 May 2021 15:34:49 UTC No. 828125

>I created procedural modeling

You did not. I was using it 30 years ago

Anonymous at Mon, 24 May 2021 16:15:48 UTC No. 828139

>>828125
Why are you still using 4chan, old man?

Anonymous at Mon, 24 May 2021 21:35:44 UTC No. 828223

>>822378
Yeah, it's like how in object oriented programming if you change the parent object, any object with inheritance explodes because the file hash is now different :^)

Anonymous at Tue, 25 May 2021 00:17:23 UTC No. 828243

>>828139
You will be old one day...and you're also here forever.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 May 2021 04:53:20 UTC No. 828281

>>822300
>It's too bad my smoothbrain can't figure out how to do more than scatter instances with it
same here LOL

Anonymous at Tue, 25 May 2021 06:45:42 UTC No. 828290

>>828281
It's alright.
Turns out that's all you really can do with it right now.
So when you can't figure out how to do more than scatter, really you're just pushing on the fringes of what's actually possible with it.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 May 2021 15:18:57 UTC No. 828364

>>822378
procedurally indexing components is not a problem in Houdini.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 May 2021 15:22:40 UTC No. 828366

>>825486
Blendlets already shit up Houdini videos. It's only going to get worse now.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 May 2021 16:11:48 UTC No. 828384

>>822310
Based and Houdinipilled

Anonymous at Wed, 26 May 2021 09:03:46 UTC No. 828525

Stop shitting up the comments on Houdini vids, insufferable blendfags

Anonymous at Fri, 4 Jun 2021 20:14:16 UTC No. 830709

WOW BUMP

Anonymous at Sun, 6 Jun 2021 16:57:56 UTC No. 831140

>>822310
wtf delete this you motherfucker!!!

Anonymous at Sun, 6 Jun 2021 17:15:12 UTC No. 831142

>>822310
And that's just the SOP context!

However it isn't just the nodes that give Houdini it's power. It's the architecture of the program, that is something that Blender will not ever be able to replicate.

Anonymous at Sun, 6 Jun 2021 17:54:34 UTC No. 831147

>>831142
Yeah not without a complete rewrite from the ground up. But that will never happen because directionless FOSS fuckery.

Anonymous at Mon, 7 Jun 2021 19:02:57 UTC No. 831485

>>822310
How many of those are actually useful? This is about quality, not quantity. Like, what the hell is an "Adobe Shape"?

Anonymous at Mon, 7 Jun 2021 21:40:15 UTC No. 831528

>>831485
>How many of those are actually useful?
All of em.
>This is about quality, not quantity.
Exactly the reason why Houdini will always be superior - it has both in spades.
>Like, what the hell is an "Adobe Shape"?
probably some vector graphics importer for Adobe Illustrator .ai files or something like that...

Anonymous at Mon, 7 Jun 2021 21:43:33 UTC No. 831532

>>822328
>but as it is now the Geometry Nodes in Blender are kind of an initial tentative release.
It's asymptotic, retard. Initial gargantuan leaps in progress and then a slow continuous slog into the infinity between where you are and a target you'll never reach.

>>822310
And here's the other side of the faggot-coin. Half of those are the same node with default settings. Geo wrangles are the same node, booleans are the same node, for loops are the same node, most vellum nodes are the same node. Most nodes have duplicate functionality for convenience, and others are there for exceedingly niche purposes where you really don't want to be without them. By the time you learn even a 10th of these nodes you'll intuitively grasp the rest.

>>822356
"Just functions". The math is not the same, faggot. Some applications of functions in both programs don't even have a known or well understood "conclusion" so where the fuck did you get this idea? Oh, and advect a few million points by a few million voxel vdb for a couple of frames and tell me again how "0.01s doesn't matter much". Spoiler: It matters.

>>825486
People hate shitbags. From Walker to the current CEO everyone at Autodesk's executive office is or has been a bond-villain tier, scumsucking corporate asshat. SideFX is a private business owned and run by people who started in computer graphics and still are today. Literally zero reason for hate and there's not going to be any.

>>831485
All of them.

>>822346
I like you. I hope whatever software you use gives you updates with stuff you want.

Anonymous at Mon, 7 Jun 2021 21:47:08 UTC No. 831535

>>822310
Sir! remove this post right now i cant cope hard enough! :((

Anonymous at Mon, 7 Jun 2021 22:01:49 UTC No. 831546

>>831485
Adobe shape looks like an hda, a custom node, so yes it's useful to whomever made it.

Houdini nodes are all very powerful and useful, the less useful nodes get deprecated and hidden from the ui, but can still be used if you wish. Sidefx is not a company that adds mindless bloat to the software to tick marketing boxes like autodesk.

Anonymous at Tue, 8 Jun 2021 02:18:46 UTC No. 831595

>>831532
Oh look, a retard.

Anonymous at Mon, 14 Jun 2021 23:00:05 UTC No. 833125

>>831528
>probably
So you actually have no fucking idea you pathetic zoomzoom piece of dogshit but you're still willing to post your opinion that "all of em." are useful.
You absolute subhuman garbage don't ever post here ever again.

Anonymous at Fri, 18 Jun 2021 18:04:08 UTC No. 833773

>>822310
Most of the times, you end up using Attrib wrangle or Attrib VOP.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Jun 2021 05:40:09 UTC No. 833895

>>831485
>>831528
>>831546
>>833125

>wat do??
It just helps make adobe style houses

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Jun 2021 13:16:14 UTC No. 833929

No thanks, I hand model cause I have a vision and ideas and put effort and hard work into the things I do.
I'm not working to churn out shit on a production line for someone else's benefit.
Procedural generation is a tool which most nu"artists" have become dependent on as a crutch.
The op picture mentions 'variations' like so many other proc memers, but all you're actually doing is introducing visual noise to obfuscate the fact that it all looks the same.
Have some self respect. Make something you can be proud of instead of slapping your name on an infinitely reproducible template churned out by an algorithm.

Don't @ me.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Jun 2021 15:35:30 UTC No. 833948

>>833895
looks pretty useful to me.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Jun 2021 16:01:52 UTC No. 833957

>>833929
I wonder how you can survive in the 21 century with that shitty brain.
EVERYTHING you said is wrong.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Jun 2021 16:44:41 UTC No. 833963

>>833957
Cool story, bro.

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Jun 2021 17:05:31 UTC No. 833965

>>833929
peak small brain post

Anonymous at Sat, 19 Jun 2021 17:11:55 UTC No. 833967

>>833965
Haha I'm sorry I triggered you, my man. If you want you can pretend I was just trolling.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Jun 2021 11:51:22 UTC No. 834102

>>833895
where do I find this?

Anonymous at Mon, 21 Jun 2021 18:39:56 UTC No. 834458

>>822296
>If I succeed, I will have procedural boobs and butts
What about the rest of the female?

Anonymous at Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:33:24 UTC No. 834467

>>834458
The virgin traditionalist coom artisan vs. The Chad late capitalist techno-coom tycoon

Anonymous at Fri, 2 Jul 2021 01:22:32 UTC No. 836494

>>833895
Neat tools!

Also, it's the first time I see Houdini being used with a 3D mouse. Looks comfortable.

Anonymous at Fri, 2 Jul 2021 11:07:31 UTC No. 836551

>>822294
So you model windows, etc yourself and then with this you decide how to place the blocks?
That's it? I thought you could arrange selections, extrusions, bevels, etc. With geometry nodes but that doesn't seem to be the case.
I wanted to make some custom meshes.

Anonymous at Sun, 4 Jul 2021 02:37:26 UTC No. 836892

>>836551
no response? yup, geometru nodes fuckin sux

Anonymous at Sun, 4 Jul 2021 02:57:37 UTC No. 836897

>>836892
That's gonna come later, its in in early development and they need to build the basics first.

Anonymous at Sun, 4 Jul 2021 03:32:36 UTC No. 836903

Blendlets are the scourge of 3D.

They shit up Instagram with their shitty "3D art" and now they're shitting up Houdini videos on YouTube.

Anonymous at Sun, 4 Jul 2021 04:08:40 UTC No. 836911

>>836903
they can't be making any worse shit than the instagram c4d community.

God please flush instagram down the toilet soon.

Anonymous at Sun, 4 Jul 2021 04:44:04 UTC No. 836914

>>836911
You have to differentiate between real artists that use Blender (and don't post on instagram), and the complete retarded Blenderfanboys that shit up comments on youtube.
The former mostly doesn't do the latter.
The other anon is right, since Blender has a couple of nodes to do stuff, they got embolden to mess with videos of Houdini and it's like an infestation of retards that shits up the comment section with absolutely insane and asinine bullshit.
That being said C4d basedboys that shit up instagram with their globohomo stuff aren't that much better.
They can all be flushed down the toiled if you ask me.

Anonymous at Sun, 18 Jul 2021 15:16:18 UTC No. 839645

>>822294
Based

Anonymous at Sun, 18 Jul 2021 20:29:31 UTC No. 839677

Anonymous at Mon, 19 Jul 2021 02:56:40 UTC No. 839717

>>836914
yup. if you do a good job and make something nice the results will speak for themselves and neither you nor anyone else will care about the tools used to make it.