bentraje

@Igor Can't confirm but I do know there will be an upcoming update on the COPS. My basis is that the legendary Bran Ray was hired as a consultant for Houdini just recently. http://www.bryanray.name/wordpress/

They introduced nodes in R20. And it's nearly R27. So roughly 3-4 years already. Definitely a mark that it should have been used already. But as you can on the latest 3d motion shows or webinars, no one is using them. maybe 1 or 2 instances? Just shows how even the presenter doesn't find it practical/useful.

@Jeff H1 RE: This feels like Autodesk and Bifrost for the first 4 years it existed. Yea. To some degree. But to be fair, Bifrost on its first iteration was mainly for VFX simulation. So it was actually understandable, there wasn't an wide adoption. But currently, it is mainstay in Maya since it can be used for general stuff like mograph, particles etc. C4D Scene nodes on the other hand was supposed to be for general usage (i.e. can easily be implemented for wide adoption) but didn't really pan out, so far. Also, I used already a lot node programs before C4D, even before Houdini. And i have to say C4D version is a bit verbose. Like setting and retrieving selection. Again, why not just improved Xpresso. It was already capable. Just need a better UI and performance. I'm never going to rant about 1) cutting the cineversity for perpetual users 2) leaving xpresso. lol RE: Redshift content on their live streams On point. So many REDUNDANT INTRODUCTION AND BASIC VIDEOS. Keyword being REDUNDANT. I'm pretty sure there is already an existing videos for the features already introduced.

Hi, Is there a viewport handle for the compose matrix nodes? Currently I have to manually set-up the transforms which is painstaking. I just want to click the node, press Enter and see the handle. Move the handle, and it should update the node. Is this possible? For reference, compose matrix somehow acts like Transform Node (i.e. Move, Rotate, Scale). I mean even the generic commands are named like Reset Transform, Freeze Transform etc. Not sure why use the name "compose matrix".

@Hrvoje Sorry for the trouble but it doesn't really delete the edges/geometry and keep points. or maybe I'm just using it wrong lol 2022-07-22_3-51-14.mp4

I do believe C4D has as much features in Blender in nodes. The main problem is there's no significant audience using C4D nodes. Which means lesser tutorials/community reference. There is a documentation. It does have some info but by and large, it's just theoretical. There is not practical examples. Example of practical examples are in https://www.tokeru.com/cgwiki/?title=Houdini where you can literally just copy and paste the node set-up and use it on a project. It's cheap, yes but it helps in easy integration. Anyway, I still stand by my sentiment on the idea of leaving xPresso to rot. It's already an existing node base system why make another node system when the existing one is already working already well. Even if we have the argument of having a new core, why not make the xpresso easily transferred to the new node system. Like convert this xpresso to new node system. And call it a day. I still explore C4D nodes but not on a production capacity. It's too risky. Not enough references to feel confident to play around and troubleshoot around it. Also, still no attributes in C4D node system. I don't get it. That's the main thing about Houdini nodes from Day 1. Attributes. They already have a reference on other existing software, why not leverage it. Even blender nodes uses attributes. *sigh

@Hrvoje Thanks for the illustration file. RE: some Houdini construct which I am not acquainted with. Not necessarily Houdini specific. Blender also has it with their geometry nodes. C4D has it too but I guess its limited to predefined attributes. The simplest example is the particles. xParticles can export age, velocity attributes etc. It's just that in Houdini. Attributes are a first class feature. So for example in this case, "generate lines by using index and topological nodes" it's too limited. Being able to determine it in specific attributes provides more control. Anyhow, for the sake of argument, on the illustration, yes yes, that's what I'm after ultimately but with an additional thing, how do I delete the existing edges and just keep points? You can refer to my example, the initial circle has only points and no edges. Is there an existing node for that? Can't seem to have the proper keyword for the search documentation.

Thanks for the response but the spline assembler doesn't seem to have an option to use id or unique attributes. or attributes is still a foreign thing in C4D?

By default, it is already reset. Like when you add a transform node, all the transforms are already at default. Position, 0 0 0. Rotation 0 0 0. Scale 1 1 1. Even if your base mesh have a scale of 1, 10, 5 or have the default 1, 1, 1. The transform node's behavior is the same.

Hi, Is it possible to connect points based on Id or unique attribute in C4D? Here is an illustration in Houdini for reference: connect_points_based_on_id.mp4 connect_points_based_on_id.hipnc

Maybe you have layers enabled in the Project file?

Here is the link. It's on the maxon site now and not on the pixologic. https://www.maxon.net/en/buy/perpetual

Uhm wait. Did Zbrush removed perpetual option in the website? Last time I checked I saw it being offered.

@eikonoklastes Thanks. It does work for this use case. This is on another related use case. The volume adjust fog is not that felixble. I cannot specify group to it to determine what specific parts are only this kind of density. I was thinking kind of this process (the illustration is in SOP). But I was hoping this could be apply in volume/iso offset. As you can see below, I specified some groups and just specify density to this groups. I want to that to a volume/iso offset.

Uhm. Not sure if we are on the same page. Again keyword is in the Volume. I can't readily use any sops node with it.

Hi, Is there a way to use density attribute on a scatter node on a volume? Keyword is on a volume. I can perfectly use the density attribute on a polygon. The problem is on the volume because the density attribute is not carried over to the volume. Case use is: Have a more scatter points on the center and less if farther from the center? Is there a way around this? scatter_on_volume_density.hipnc

Ah gotcha. Ended up using Transform Extruded Front. Works as expected. Thanks!

Hi, I'm trying to procedurally model an arrow but I encountered a weird behavior (i.e. small increments of distance puts the new face to infinity). How do I go about solving this? houdini_polyextrude_weird_behavior.mp4 weird_polyextrude_behavior.hipnc

Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification 🙂

Naah. I think its just a bug. It's the same with me but I can post and reply to threads. So technically, I'm a member haha.

Not sure about this but can't the new pose library save animation? If its not, you can convert you animation to motion clip and just import it to another. Provided you have the same joint heirarchy/naming convention on your characters.

Ah gotcha. I guess that make sense since there is no actual position attribute on primitive.

Sure sure. I added some curl noise so the displacement would be more obvious. : ) displace_along_normals.hipnc

Hi, For some reason, displace along normals is not working on primitive vop sop. Interestingly, the same set-up when using point vop sop works as expected. Is there a prerequisite in using the node for primitive vop sop?

I can only speak for my experience. The reason why I went with Houdini is not necessarily how "cool" (i.e. all the FX (pyro/fluids/particles) you can deliver) or how "procedural" it is. It was merely because it solve a problem. As my projects became more complex, I couldn't do it in C4D any longer. Or if I can do it, there is just too much work around. A straightforward example is the clones. In C4D, you can't manipulate the individual clones freely. I mean you can but from my experience you'll probably realize its not that manageable. With Houdini, with the power of attributes, you can literally do anything. When I bought xParticles. I thought okay I don't need Houdini any longer. But not really. No offense for Insydium. xParticles is great. It can deliver of course. But in comparison to Houdini of building a system for sustainability, xParticles just can't compare. For example in Houdini, you can do post correction on your sim. Which is a massive plus. You don't have to just fully rely on your initial parameters.