Advanced Member L'Ancien Regime Posted December 28, 2014 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 28, 2014 Let's just step aside and look at some other very fecund procedural approaches to texturing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor ajz3d Posted December 28, 2014 Contributor Report Share Posted December 28, 2014 Thanks, that's a nice find. I'm seriously considering buying those tuts. I find dealing with VEX a little bit difficult, so I hope this will shed some more light on how to move around VOPs more easily. I don't know if Houdini Engine supports procedural maps, but if it does, then that's yet another reason of integrating HE in 3D-Coat. Being able to tweak custom procedural textures / noise in real time inside 3D-Coat would be incredible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psmith Posted December 28, 2014 Report Share Posted December 28, 2014 Certainly there are more than several ways to skin the texturing cat. But, is that really what we should be talking about? To me, the topic should be "How to Achieve Photo-realistic Texturing Results with the Minimum of Energy and Effort". Houdini has been with us a very long time - and it has always been poised to support the Technical Directors among us. It is probably the best all around 3D application for the technician. 3D-Coat, on the other hand, has tried to strike a balance between the technician and the artist - offering bushels full of technical possibilities and technical variables for the technicians among us to use in their pursuits, as well as a straight forward pipeline for simple designers and artists like me. Results being output compared to effort being input is a ratio worth considering - whether you are a technician or an artist. Of course, there is the aspect of puzzle solving, which technicians consider as part of the challenge and reward of texturing. I think artists tend to simply want acceptable results with the minimum of effort. Looking at the demo posted in this thread - and then, at the complex texturing network being constructed to produce common, everyday texturing results - I'd certainly prefer to use 3D-Coat to achieve a similar result. It requires much less time, effort and is more enjoyable and instant than a more complex solution. What do you think? Greg Smith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Denis Posted December 28, 2014 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 28, 2014 I tried Houdini apprentice a few years ago and quickly came to the conclusion that I wasn't bright enough to learn that monster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Grimm Posted December 28, 2014 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 28, 2014 LOL I took a look at it too and it appeared to me to be some unholy union of a 3d package and Excel. I can see the power in it, but the learning curve is way to large for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member L'Ancien Regime Posted December 28, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 28, 2014 Houdini is indeed a terrifying monster. Like Winston Churchill said; "Claret for boys, Port for men, but for heroes? Brandy." "Photoshop for boys, Maya for men, but for heroes? Houdini". I think that fits... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.