Hey again :-)
After many months of polishing, adding new features and cleaning up my graph, I decided to put my Jackfruit project file on G*mroad for everyone to explore and tinker with on their own leisure. If you’re interested, follow my linktree on my profile. Thanks <3
usually i would do this with rbd + vellum, but i wanted to try it with mpm instead. not the same amount of control and it needs a lot of clean up, but overall i think you can get a realistic and more natural look.
Hello guys , I need an artist for tutoring and helping me, I don't want keep asking questions over and over,help can't always be free and to be honest, I'm bit fed up with my inability to move on flip like others sims, I have been stuck for weeks just cause each time I lack experience to deal with model prep, issues of wedging etc.
No matter how much i debug and read documentation, I still think I have hard time for some models to react correctly , prolly because there's theory that comes with time experience of an artist work and I would like to learn/help for debugging.
My questions are around cross wedgings, simulation, and model prep for flip.
Is there any tutor here that has leaning in flip sims ? You can give me your prices guys so I can consider this.
Thank you
What is the most Houdini way to do this nowadays
By segment, I mean the process of partitioning an image into distinct regions or pixel-level masks and linking them to natural language prompts or semantic concepts
-- assuming this is done on a rasterized version of the curve set, and that the regions attributes are then transferred back to the original curve afterwards.
For example: starting from an EPS file of a side view of car, I would like to get some kind of attribute for each point / curve / connected piece, in order to make it easier to make something with said curve.
Any thoughts ? There is so much data available in the context of AI training, it would be nice to be able to augment any geometry in such a way. I guess it's already solved in a much bigger context though, as is almost anything nowadays
For example say you have this in SOP as curves.
how to segment it semantically, to help rebuild it as a 3d model, set texures and whatnot
I’m still a beginner in English, so I usually study English tutorials and documentation with subtitles and the help of AI for translation and clarification.
So far, I’ve gone through several SOP tutorials and practiced some basic VEX through simple particle work. Right now, I’m focusing on learning Pyro.
Going forward, I’m planning to focus on one FX discipline at a time.
This isn’t simply because I want to study different areas one after another.
Rather than touching several areas at the same time and only learning each one superficially, I want to focus on one area, understand how it works and how to control it, and gradually build up a list of things I can genuinely say, “I can make this myself.”
My goal is to keep building up those capabilities one by one and gradually expand my overall FX skill set.
So for now, I want to make Pyro my main focus and develop a solid understanding of it, and then eventually move on to other FX areas such as RBD and particles.
Of course, this is a learning plan I’ve come up with based on my own reasoning as a beginner, so I’d also really like to know how this approach looks from the perspective of people who actually work in the industry.
My main question right now is about SOP Pyro and COP Pyro.
Based on how Houdini has traditionally been used, I would naturally expect SOP Pyro to be the main place to learn Pyro.
However, with Houdini 22, COP Pyro has become much more substantial. It no longer feels like the old idea of COPs being mainly for 2D/image processing, and it can now handle Pyro simulations in a much more complete way.
I’ve actually tried COP Pyro in H22, and I found it very intuitive. Iterating on parameters and immediately seeing the result also feels extremely fast.
So what I’m wondering is:
“If you were starting to learn Houdini 22 from scratch today, how would you approach SOP Pyro and COP Pyro?”
In previous versions of Houdini, I would naturally expect SOP Pyro to be the obvious starting point. But now that COP Pyro is becoming a much more significant part of Houdini, how would you personally learn Pyro if you were starting today with H22?
For example:
I’m not really asking which one is simply “better.”
I’m more interested in what learning order and division of roles would make the most sense if you were learning Pyro today, taking the current state of Houdini 22 into account.
I’m especially interested in perspectives based on the current H22 workflow, rather than advice that mainly comes from older versions of Houdini.
I’d also like to hear your thoughts on my idea of building up my skills one capability at a time.
For example:
I’m still at the stage where I’m figuring out how Houdini and FX actually work, so I’d really appreciate honest advice from people who use Houdini professionally.
In particular, I’d love to hear from anyone currently using Houdini 22 or familiar with the more recent workflows.
Hey y'all :-)
It's been a while since I started working on this. I was surprised by the positive reception to this project and some people asked me if I could publish the project file. So I spent some time polishing it, adding new features and learning a little bit of Karma to bring it to a state I'm comfortable sharing.
If you're interested, check the YouTube videos description for the G*mroad link.
The solver is based on the Wētā FX paper (Guided Two-Way Coupled Bubbles + explicit SPH + manifold advection). The underwater bubble system features a locally resimulated fluid with two-way coupling to the bubbles. The foam is handled via an SPH simulation projected onto a 2D manifold of the water surface. The solver implements standard SPH forces such as viscosity (mu), cohesion (C for strength, beta_c for radius), and surface friction against the water. The original authors apply a particle volume multiplier to the cohesion force. While this is valid and supported as an option in my solver, I prefer using the neighbor's volume multiplier instead of the active particle's volume. To my eye, this yields visually superior foam clustering.
The foam is constrained to the surface via manifold advection: forces are decomposed into tangential and normal components, the normal component is discarded, and particles are projected back onto the water surface using Newton iterations.
I can confidently say this looks significantly better than both the standard Whitewater Solver and POP Fluid workflows. Additionally, POP Fluid lacks support for variable particle radii, which has always been a major limitation for me.
I am trying to create a stylized particle simulation in a fast moving wing animated geometry
I tried using a method like freezing the mesh and
did a base pyro simulation and then pop advected particles using the pyro sim
which results in a stylized particle simulation on static mesh but a after point deform it into the animated mesh
The points are like more sticked into the geometry and the lost that stylized flowing effect
Still the particles are flowing but its not evident enough when the geometry is animated
Any fix to do that or should i sim it in the animated geometry itself.?
An underrated component of the Alembic Standard is layering. Making it's first appearance around H17.5 / H18.0, and more than a bit later in Maya (in a mangled state), this is a criminally under-used way of working in CG.
It is very USD-like at it's core, and is still a viable option for anyone not needing/wanting the technical overheads of USD, but wanting a better way to author data from multiple Depts/Steps non-destructively.
