




Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 16:38:44 AST
From: bartlone@ct.med.ge.com (Mike Bartolone 5-4266)
Subject: Re: OrigamiGo (origo)

OrigamiGo doesn't work if you are running it on an IBM...too many
characters in the name...how about OriGo or just GamiGo (folding
language, or paper language).

Mike





Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 16:48:03 AST
From: larrys@zk3.dec.com
Subject: Re: OrigamiGo (origo)

>If this sounds good, we should consider going to a less public forum, and
>occassionally posting milestones to origami-l, so we don't burden everyone
>else with technical discussions.

I agree.  I suspect there may be a few people who feel like their
little art group has been invaded by The Computer People, but they've
been very tolerant up until now.

Perhaps the keeper of the origami-l list would like to set up an
origamigo-l to go with it?  I've seen no objections to that name,
it's cool with me, do I hear any seconds?  [ subdued cheer from
the tolerant people ]

>there is now a mathematical model for
>paper in virtual reality, which can be folded!

This I had not heard.  I'd like to see this, and any references we have,
but this is surely moving outside the bounds of origami-l, so perhaps
we'd best wait until origamigo-l is up.

Larry Smith
larrys@alpha.zk3.dec.com





Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 17:15:18 AST
From: larrys@zk3.dec.com
Subject: Re: OrigamiGo (origo)

>OrigamiGo doesn't work if you are running it on an IBM

Heh!  Forgot about that.  What does origo or gamigo mean
in Japanese?

Larry





Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 17:36:24 AST
From: Tak To <tto@aspentec.com>
Subject: RE: re: description language (origo)

Baz said:

> The task at hand
> is a natural-language description of origami, which has never
> been done before.

I understand your goal.  My question is whether this "natural language"
can be easily handled by the computer, hence useful to us in someway.

Tak.

Tak To                                                    (617) 577-0310 x377
Box 45, MIT Branch PO, Cambridge, Ma 02139.                  tto@aspentec.com





Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 17:48:08 AST
From: bartlone@ct.med.ge.com (Mike Bartolone 5-4266)
Subject: Re: OrigamiGo (origo)

I forget which is which, but one would mean paper language, and
the other would mean fold language...isn't that right? (Basing it
on the original post about origamigo)

>Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 17:15:18 AST
>Reply-To: origami-l@nstn.ns.ca
>From: larrys@zk3.dec.com
>To: Multiple recipients of list <origami-l@nstn.ns.ca>
>Subject: Re: OrigamiGo (origo)
>
>>OrigamiGo doesn't work if you are running it on an IBM
>
>Heh!  Forgot about that.  What does origo or gamigo mean
>in Japanese?
>
>Larry
>





Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 20:25:21 AST
From: lavin@MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: OrigamiGo (origo)

>From: larrys@zk3.dec.com
> ...
>Heh!  Forgot about that.  What does origo or gamigo mean
>in Japanese?

Well...Japanese has a lot of homophones, so I can't say for sure; and
it would depend on how you wrote it.  I did a search in our online
dictionary, and didn't come up with any specific matches to either
"origo" or "kamigo" as complete words, which means that neither of
them is a normal word in everyday use.  However, there are plenty of
things which are pronounced "ori" and "go" and "kami" individually, so
compounds of them are not impossible...No compounds I can make of the
various meanings seem like they'd have any awful connotations -- most
are nonsensical to my eye, but you never know.

If you wrote them with the appropriate kanji, then the two words could
mean:

        ori.go               fold(ing) language
        kami.go               paper language

The "gami" in "origami," as most folks seem to know, means "paper,"
but is actually a different form of the usual word, "kami."  In
Japanese, non-voiced sounds become voiced in compounds, so the "ka"
sound becomes "ga," etc.

And take all this with a grain of salt, I've only been studying the
language for a few years.  For all I know either one has some terrible
slang meaning, referring to someone's mother's bathing habits or
something.  :)

Anne R. LaVin                    | "Say, Pooh, why aren't YOU busy?" I said.
lavin@mit.edu                    | "Because it's a nice day," said Pooh.
MIT Information Systems          | "Yes, but---"
(617) 253-0115                   | "Why ruin it?" he said.





Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 23:12:51 AST
From: r.follmer@genie.geis.com
Subject: Convention

Hi again  8)  (I weare glasses!)

Yes, I too willbe there, but will camp ourt at my daughters homew on Staten
Island ( if I get there).

I would lke to propose that tjhose of un on this line have the large
initials on our name tags "OLO" so we will know those that are on the On
Line Origami.  I would like to meet those of us here...perhaps a lunch or
midnite snack???

What say 'u' ???

Bob





Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 23:34:31 AST
From: Soylent Green <rhudson@yorkcol.edu>
Subject: Coochi Coochi Coo

-Tom "Tickles" Hull

Would you care to explain the "tickles" folding method?  It sounds fascinating
:)

Rob "Tendrils" Hudson





Date: Mon, 4 Apr 94 15:20:07 ADT
From: Marc_Hache@MBnet.MB.CA (Marc Hache)
Subject: An idea for Kawasaki's Rose

Grumble,  grumble. I got booted off the mailing list sometime after
Thursday. I was wondering why it was so quiet. Anyway....

I was in the mall on the weekend and walked into a "Body Shop" type store
(sells enviro/animal friendly type lotions, soaps, oils etc.) and they had
something called rosewater. The familiar, but far too infrequent, light
bulb went on and I picked some up. I put a few drops on some roses I was
making for my wife, and voila ! I had very pretty origami roses with a
rose scent that lasted a couple of hours.

She was very impressed. |)

Later,
Marc
hache@mbnet.mb.ca





Date: Mon, 4 Apr 94 15:55:25 ADT
From: hull@cs.uri.edu (Tom Hull)
Subject: RE: Origami, Plain and Simple and MATH

RE: Origami Plain and Simple
      The models in the book are (hold on - I'm doing this from memory)
Simple Folds: Frog with a Big Mouth, Owl and Owlet, Holy Shield, Abstract
Elephant, Scotty Dog, Simple Wallet

Action Folds: Talking Bird, Funky Swan, Cobra (it strikes!), "Kiss Me"
Greeting Card, Raven Mask, Throwing Dart

Modular Folds: Pinwheel-Ring-Pinwheel (the same one as in _The Magic of
Origami_), Ornamental Thingie, Sunburst, Stabile, Squared Square & Cube,
Three Wise Men, Sea Serpent, Chess Set

Frog Pond: Frog Head with a Big Mouth, Frog with a Big Mouth in Flight,
Frog with a Big Mouth, Tounge, and Eyes.

Getting Tricky: Elephant I, Angel Fish, His Lady's Voice (a dog), Bald Eagle,
Rabbit, Tesselating Fish, Elephant II

Oh yeah! I forgot to mention the SImple Fish in the Simple Folds chapter!
That's it (unless I forgot any).

All models are new and never-before published (except the Pinwheel-ring, and
the Scotty Dog appeared in a Friends Annual Collection a while back).

The book should be in any bookstore that normally carries origami books.
If you don't see it, ask your bookstore to order you a copy.

RE: the origami-math talks
     My paper "On the Mathematics of Flat Origamis" incompases the stuff
I'll be talking about. I'm working on getting a copy put in the archives,
but have had no luck. It's in LaTeX, with Mac pictures, and I haven't been
able to get a EPS file to work on the Unix-style laser printer at school.
I'll keep trying.

--------------------------- Tom "outta be studying" Hull





Date: Mon, 4 Apr 94 21:11:30 ADT
From: r.follmer@genie.geis.com
Subject: OLO

Larry:

I suppose I could make quite a few puns on this, but I will spare you!

OLO... for those of us going to the convention, place these initials on the
name badge so we will know who of us are in the On Line Origami group.

I for one am looking forward to meeting some of the rest of us who are here.
Names are great, but to meet the person in thre flesh adds so much more to
the conversation!

Have a fun day!

Bob





Date: Fri, 1 Apr 94 10:24:50 AST
From: larrys@zk3.dec.com
Subject: Re: OrigamiGo (origo)

>No compounds I can make of the
>various meanings seem like they'd have any awful connotations  [...]

>ori.go         fold(ing) language

That's good enough for me.  Origo, final call, speak now or forever
[f|h]old your p[ea|ei]ce (has anyone ever folded a piece?  And if so,
did they fold any paper bullets to go with it?).  Origo, going once,
going twice...

Larry





Date: Fri, 1 Apr 94 10:31:38 AST
From: larrys@zk3.dec.com
Subject: Re: Baz! (origo)

>I'd much rather run something on an IBM than crawl with a Mac!

Boy, BOYS!  :)

I think origo is a good choice, it's short, it means something,
albeit in japanese, it's related to what the language is for,
and it shortens to origo-l for the mailing list.  I don't think
DOS will mind origo.exe or origo.com, and unix will probably
call it oc, anyway.  :)

Larry Smith
larrys@alpha.zk3.dec.com





Date: Fri, 1 Apr 94 12:14:04 AST
From: Brian Ewins <gapv64@udcf.gla.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: OriGo

FYI:
        Tcl/Tk has (very recently) been ported to MS-Windows;
since it's already free for Macs & X-windows this may be the
most portable way of writing the 'wysiwig' end of the program.
Gosh, I love free software.
               Baz.





Date: Fri, 1 Apr 94 20:37:24 AST
From: samreye@aol.com
Subject: Re: OLO

I just wanted to write to say that I second the motion for these initials.
It sounds like a pretty cool idea and it would be a great way for computer
users to get in touch with each other.  Wasn't that kinda  sentimental?????

P.S.  Hey Baz, Macs rule.  (Actually, that was an April Fools joke cause I
own an IBM)      (:o|

Later,
Jim





Date: Sat, 2 Apr 94 10:48:12 AST
From: Mark Morden <marmonk@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Looking for Heart Locket and Grand Piano

I have been out of town for a week, otherwise I would have responded
sooner.  I hope this is still relavant.  Gay Merrill Gross has a book out
titled "The Art of Origami." The heart locket is included.  The book is
published by BDD Illustrated Books (ISBN 0-7924-5841-9)  A good looking,
hard-cover-with-glossy-photos book for only $13.

Mark Morden
marmonk@eskimo.com





Date: Sat, 2 Apr 94 10:56:06 AST
From: Mark Morden <marmonk@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: kawasaki's rose

On Tue, 29 Mar 1994, Soylent Green wrote:

> Whichever rose is in "Origami for the Connoiseur" is a good model, the only
> thing "imperfect" about it is the lock on the bottom.. if there were a better
> lock, then I would probably classify that as "near" perfect.. now if only
     there
> were a decent modular rose and leaf/stem apparatus...
>
> Rob
>
>
I saw in the Biddles' latest book a rose model that included four leaves
all from one piece of paper.  I only browsed through the book at the
store, so I can't describe much more than that.  Looked impressive though.





Date: Sat, 2 Apr 94 14:56:00 AST
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Takahama's Rose Brooch (was Re: kawasaki's rose)

On Sat, 2 Apr 1994, Mark Morden wrote:

> I saw in the Biddles' latest book a rose model that included four leaves
> all from one piece of paper.  I only browsed through the book at the
> store, so I can't describe much more than that.  Looked impressive though.

It's okay. The model is called "Rose Brooch" and is by Toshie Takahama.
There are two problems with this model: (i) it is rather flat, and (ii) the
rose and the leaves are all of the same colour. Problem (ii) can be solved
by some clever reverals to used the back of the paper to make the leaves a
different colour, but problem (i) seems unsolvable. Mrs. Takahama relies on
the thickness of many layers of paper to give body to the rose, but it just
doesn't seem to work. I'll take Kawasaki's rose any day.





Date: Sat, 2 Apr 94 17:53:00 AST
From: Soylent Green <rhudson@yorkcol.edu>
Subject: Biddle's Book

That's a great rose.. I've folded a few of them.. looks great in foil. .only
thing is, it's not as 3-d as I'd like, and the leaves are the same color as the
rose.. that's the only hangup.. I suppose you could get special paper...

Rob





Date: Sat, 2 Apr 94 18:35:46 AST
From: MJNAUGHTON@amherst.edu
Subject: FOCA Convention

I, too, will be there (I wouldn't miss it for the world!).  I'll probably be
trotting out my "Sonobe Module Workshop" and my "Omega Star Workshop" once
again -- unless the screams of protest become too loud!  Tom H & Tom S (& every
one else) I'm looking forward to seeing you there. . . . Tom S, be careful --
you may be b-l-o-o-o-w-n away, being in the same room as HUNDREDS of folders
(though Robert Lang might be surprised to hear that all serious folding
happens east of the big muddy).
I like the "OLO" idea -- what do people think?
Mike "Oh God, not another modular!" Naughton





Date: Sat, 2 Apr 94 19:40:15 AST
From: Soylent Green <rhudson@yorkcol.edu>
Subject: PLANZ

I'd like to go to convention.. depends on if anyone locally I know is going..
don't know if I'd be able to trek to NY alone.. have to find accomodations and
all that good stuff.  Money may not be so much of a problem as security. I've
never really been to the NY city.

Rob "El Naive"





Date: Sun, 3 Apr 94 16:58:27 ADT
From: MJNAUGHTON@amherst.edu
Subject: convention planz

Re: "El Naive"'s concerns -- never say never, but the convention milieu in NYC
is pretty safe -- the convention is held in FIT, and dorms are right across
the street (and the street is blocked off, so it's pretty quiet).  Very
different from before, when many people stayed in hotels and then had to
walk several blocks to get to the site.  Hope to see you there!





Date: Mon, 4 Apr 94 11:01:38 ADT
From: hull@cs.uri.edu (Tom Hull)
Subject: RE: My new book AND math!

Howdy people! This here is a two-part announcement.

Numero-uno: ORIGAMI, PLAIN AND SIMPLE, by Robert Neale and yours truly,
is now officialy available. Here's the info:

ORIGAMI, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. By Robert Neale and Thomas Hull, St. Martin's Press,
ISBN 0-312-10516(pbk.), 112pp., $10.95 ($14.95 Can.).

The book contains 32 models, and is way-simple to solid-intermediate level.
The book has 5 chapters:
     Simple Folds
     Action Folds
     Modular Folds
     Frog Pond
     Getting Tricky
All models are the creations of Robert Neale. I'm responsible for the diagrams,
writing, and bizzarre humor. I hope some of you will get a kick out of it.
I'll leave it to someone else to actually review the book.

Numero-two-o: The second announcement is for upcoming origami-math lectures
that I'll be giving. I've been invited to speak at the following:

Wesleyan University, Middletown, Conn. April 12 at 4:15pm. Room 618 of the
Science Tower.

University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras Campus, San Juan, Puerto Rico,
June 4. I'll be the main lecturer at the Third Junior Mathematics Research
Meeting.

     The talk I'll be giving is titled "Origami: how to do math without
scissors or glue". It'll be mostly about my flat origami research.
Maybe I'll see some of you there?

----------------- Tom "too sexy for my boots" Hull





Date: Mon, 4 Apr 94 11:40:24 ADT
From: bartlone@ct.med.ge.com (Mike Bartolone 5-4266)
Subject: RE: My new book AND math!

Would it be possible to get a simple listing of the names of the 32 models
in the book?

Mike





Date: Mon, 4 Apr 94 12:19:38 ADT
From: mjt@stubbs.ucop.edu (Michael Thwaites)
Subject: RE: My new book AND math!

Tom -

>Numero-uno: ORIGAMI, PLAIN AND SIMPLE, by Robert Neale and yours truly,
>is now officialy available. Here's the info:
>
>ORIGAMI, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. By Robert Neale and Thomas Hull, St. Martin's Press,
>ISBN 0-312-10516(pbk.), 112pp., $10.95 ($14.95 Can.).

Sounds great - Do I contact the publisher directly or do you think it has
hit tha stands and my local book store will have it?

>Numero-two-o: ...
>     The talk I'll be giving is titled "Origami: how to do math without
>scissors or glue". It'll be mostly about my flat origami research.
>Maybe I'll see some of you there?

This sounds interesting! Sorry - I can't make either of those locations. Do
you think anyone will take and post notes?
Michael Thwaites, UC-DLA





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 10:00:30 ADT
From: "M.J.van.Gelder" <M.J.van.Gelder@rc.rug.nl>
Subject: Making diagrams (origo)

I think a lot of us are interested in how to diagram a model once you have
found a new one. Diagramming on a computer is possible with a variety of
programs. But none of them is very easily usable (my own program ORIDRAW
isn't either!). You have to tell where the lines, arrows, shades ... are.

It should be possible to tell a program:

   Use a square with corners named A, B, C and D
   Fold side A-B to side D-C
or:
   Fold point A to point B

and view the result on your screen.

The programmers among us are discussing how to devise a new language for this
and creating an Origami Language (OriGo is ok) is a good goal. But keep the
language clear for non-programmers! I think that everybody should be able
to read and write in that language. So don't use infix, postfix or somthing
like that.

I think (nearly) everybody can see what this folding sequence will give:

   Use a square with corners named A, B, C and D
   Precrease A to C
   Precrease B to D
   Turn the paper over
   Precrease A-B to D-C giving points L on A-D and R on B-C
   Precrease A-D to B-C giving point T on C-D
   Turn over
   Fold together R to T, L to T, A to D and B to C

Whereas when you write this in infix, postfix, ... you will have a lot of
trouble to read (and also write!) it.
Well, I see that computers are better with that ...fix, but we are humans and
have to write and read the language.

Maarten van Gelder                   M.J.van.Gelder@RC.RUG.NL
Lichtboei 210                        Rekencentrum Rijksuniversiteit RuG
9732 JK  Groningen                   Groningen
Holland                              Holland





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 10:24:30 ADT
From: tjj@rolf.helsinki.fi (Timo Jokitalo)
Subject: Re: OrigamiGo (origo)

> first.  However, when it gets to putting it together, I think it would be
> interesting to distribute the effort over the Internet, allowing several
     people
> to design modules.  We could collaborate on the project without even meeting,
> just do the whole thing in cyberspace.  I'm sure it's been done before.
> If this sounds good, we should consider going to a less public forum, and
> occassionally posting milestones to origami-l, so we don't burden everyone
> else with technical discussions.

Hear, hear! I think that this way of proceeding could indeed produce a nice
product. I would also be glad to contribute in the programming parts, if and
when the project is in a state where contributions can be included in a
sensible way!

        Timo





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 11:37:31 ADT
From: Kathryn Dudley <kdudley@isnet.is.wfu.edu>
Subject: Honda's World of Origami

        Is anyone familiar with Isao Honda's book, _World of Origami_
(1965?)?  I came across it in the family bookcase and appropriated it.
It seems to give a spectrum of folds and I was just wondering how the
experienced "hands" in OLO considered it.  Also, in re not cutting:  does
it count if you make cuts in the paper BEFORE you start folding?  Honda
has a few like that.

Thanks for all replies in advance!!!

Kathryn





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 11:45:57 ADT
From: Brian Ewins <gapv64@udcf.gla.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Takahama's Rose Brooch (was Re: kawasaki's rose)

Hi,
        Just out of curiosity: has anyone ever seen
a rose folded with the correct petal ratios ? (5:2)
... it would take some neat logarithmic spiralling, I
guess.
               Baz.





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 12:45:33 ADT
From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org>
Subject: Re: Honda's World of Origami

>       Is anyone familiar with Isao Honda's book, _World of Origami_
> (1965?)?  I came across it in the family bookcase and appropriated it.
> It seems to give a spectrum of folds and I was just wondering how the
> experienced "hands" in OLO considered it.  Also, in re not cutting:  does
> it count if you make cuts in the paper BEFORE you start folding?  Honda
> has a few like that.
>
> Thanks for all replies in advance!!!
Am I familiar with that book? Hah! A long, long, time ago....
It was the book that got me started on Origami. I never heard of the term
until I saw that book in an elementary school library. No book store had it
but McGraw Hill ordered it for me from Japan. It brings back memories :-)

I still recall that I just loved his elephant (compound figure), and never
could complete his rose or whatever he calls it.

 >>><<<Sheldon Ackerman>>><<<
>>ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org<<





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 14:18:55 ADT
From: Soylent Green <rhudson@yorkcol.edu>
Subject: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

I enjoyed Honda's book when I first got it- especially the part with the
rectangular models out of 8.5x11 (incidentally, does anyone know of any
favorite models that are made out of 8.5x11?), and I did a couple of her
modular animals, but eventually got tired of the fact that there were other
materials involved, e.g. glue, and scissors.. that put me off a bit.

Rob





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 16:15:12 ADT
From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

> I enjoyed Honda's book when I first got it- especially the part with the
> rectangular models out of 8.5x11 (incidentally, does anyone know of any
> favorite models that are made out of 8.5x11?), and I did a couple of her
> modular animals, but eventually got tired of the fact that there were other
> materials involved, e.g. glue, and scissors.. that put me off a bit.

Well, it being the first book I ever saw on Origami, who knew that cutting
or glue was taboo?
Oh, before I forget....The book I have pictures Honda as a distinguished
looking gentleman--not a her :-)

 >>><<<Sheldon Ackerman>>><<<
>>ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org<<





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 16:27:44 ADT
From: Agnes Tomorrow <atom@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

        There are some swell things you can make using scissors (and
sometimes even [gasp!] glue)...but you can't call them origami!
        I particularly like a very simple penguin, one of the best
abstract images of that bird, which involves *just one* little cut to
split the tail...and I sigh, because even though I really like it, I know
it's not *really* origami.

Agnes Tomorrow
atom@u.washington.edu





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 16:44:50 ADT
From: Soylent Green <rhudson@yorkcol.edu>
Subject: honda him?

I also recall getting that book when I was uncultured (around 9 years old), so
the name Isao probably struck me as a female name :)





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 18:04:03 ADT
From: ab682@leo.nmc.edu (Nancy Nietupski)
Subject: Origami Plain and Simple

Hi Tom,

   I was passing a book store this afternoon and couldn't resist
running and taking a quick look at the origami books on the self
and your new

Nancy Nietupski
ab682@leo.nmc.edu





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 18:15:54 ADT
From: ab682@leo.nmc.edu (Nancy Nietupski)
Subject: Origami Plain and Simple - take 2

Sorry about the first incomplete message.  I am having horrendous
computer problems (I am reduded to using a stand alone modem and
dumb terminal!).

Let's try it one more time.

Hi Tom,

    I got a quick look at your new book today and it looks great!
I will pick it up and take it home next pay day.  The chess set
is really nice and the elephants are quite unique.
   I didn't mention the other day (because of my computer problem)
that I was pleasantly surprised at your simple frog.  I followed the
written directions quite easily and it gave me a good laugh when I
finished it.  He is one of my favorite frogs!
   I am not one of those folks who love to fold the altra-technical
type models.  I will do it, but i can't say I derive a lot of joy
from it.  So when I come across a simple but elegant model, they
are like wonderful gifts.

Thanks,

Nancy

Nancy Nietupski
ab682@leo.nmc.edu





Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 21:09:39 ADT
From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

>       There are some swell things you can make using scissors (and
> sometimes even [gasp!] glue)...but you can't call them origami!
>       I particularly like a very simple penguin, one of the best
> abstract images of that bird, which involves *just one* little cut to
> split the tail...and I sigh, because even though I really like it, I know
> it's not *really* origami.
Seriously, why can't you call "them" origami if cutting and/or glue is
involved?   Isao HOnda considers his models origami. Who decides?

 >>><<<Sheldon Ackerman>>><<<
>>ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org<<





Date: Tue, 05 Apr 1994 21:28:28 -0300 (ADT)
From: lcasey@koko.csustan.EDU (Linda Casey)
Subject: Re: Origami Plain and Simple - take 2

Tom's book is super!  The diagrams are easy, the models are nice, and there is
a creative little story showing all the models.

Well don!

Linda Casey
Modesto, CA





Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 12:56:32 ADT
From: Brian Ewins <gapv64@udcf.gla.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: OrigamiGo (origo)

Hi,
        more thoughts on the lingo , this time on the
internals. Remember, I tried to make this separate from
the language you type, so this is _not_ what you see
at the top level.

paper is represented as a linked list (actually a tree)
of polygons. these polygons have the structure (C syntax)
{
        int edges;
        line edge[edges];
}
lines have the structure:
{
        point from,to;
        float length;
        float from_left,from_right,to_left,to_right; /*angles*/
        ploygon left,right;
        int oriented; /* -1=left over right,1=right over left,0 is coplanar*/
}
points have the structure:
{
        float x,y;
}

Ok, now I'll explain what's going on. This is intended for
representing flat origami with no tucks. Each polygon
has an anticlockwise list of its edges. Since an edge
can only be common to two polygons, we call these 'left'
and 'right', and label the ends of the edge 'from' and
'to', arbitrarily.
      left
from\______/to    .... like this.
    /      \
      right
The angles in the left and right polygons are labelled
'from_left', etc ... this should be obvious (?) I hope.
The postioning of every polygon can be figured out from
the positioning of a previous one; we just need to pick
a starting polygon arbitrarily. (but consistently)
        The 'oriented' label is used to order sides from
front to back; if two connected polygons are not coplanar
then they must appear as different colours, and one must
lie in front of another. How this is used to display
models correctly (and implicitly include more complicated
layer orderings) is described later.
        This is better than using the coordinates at the
points (which I only include for convenience later) to
postion the polygons for a number of reasons: firstly,
if you fold a polygon which lies between two groups
like this:

|    |    |    |    |    |
|____|____|____|____|____|
             ^fold here.
then the _only_ polygon which needs to be updated is the one which
contains the fold (I gloss over for the moment the problem
of _finding_ the polygon which contains the fold). Also, since there
is less updating of floating point numbers invloved, numerical
errors propogate more slowly.(with a point representation,
polygons would slowly drift together or apart). I would also argue
that this is a more natural rep. than using the points, since
we often bisect angles or edges, but never 'in real life' refer
to coordinates of points.
        There is a problem of 'finding' the polygon(s) divided
by a fold, for instance, consider folding the diagram above in
half. The problems that arise when we say 'fold one end to
the other' would take several paragraphs to describe (but
a minute to draw!)
The drawing algorithm:
Start with first poly in array:
1:Are there any unpainted polys connected to this one which lie under it?
        Yes: for each, do subroutine at (1)
        No: Paint this polygon.
        For each coplanar connected polygon,
               do subroutine at (1)
        For each other connected polygon,
               do subroutine at (1)
end subroutine (1)

This paints all the polygons in the model starting with those at the back,
it's basically tree recursion. It should correctly show layers which
lie 'between' each other, but will fail on models like this one:
Fold a square in half diagonally.
________  now fold the 2 45 degree corners in, tucking one inside
\      /  the other.
 \    /
  \  /
   \/
________  (Enlarged). The problem here is that there is an unconnected
|   /  | overlap. However, all the points will be shown in the right
|  /\  | place, so this could be used iternally to locate points, and
| /  \ | therefore all polygons affected by a fold.
|/    \|
 \    /
  \  /
   \/
... hope this made some sense. It's dificult to wave your hands on e-mail.
Incidentally, if Tom Hull is reading this, I'm curious to know what rep.
is used in your maths papers for origami ? I guess that must work.

               Cheers,
                     Baz.





Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 14:59:54 ADT
From: Agnes Tomorrow <atom@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: On-Line Origami (WWW Mosaic)

On Wed, 6 Apr 1994, M.J.van.Gelder wrote:

> Via Mosaic it is also possible to access Gopher space. Our archives are in
> there.
> Try to look in the Netherlands (I don't know via what route) and then via
> 'Groningen', 'University of Groningen', 'Rekencentrum/Computing center',
> 'Anonymous FTP', 'Origami', ....

        Actually, I have done this--the reason I asked about WWW,
however, is that there, you can SEE the pictures right on the screen--if
the diagrams, etc. were there, it would be possible to look at them
without haveing to run them through a printing and decoding process (or
whatever it is that turns the unintelligible stuff I see on the screen
into the elegant drawings that come out of the printer...)--I was amazed
when I saw the sorts of things available *directly* on screen through
WWW.

Agnes Tomorrow
atom@u.washington.edu





Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 16:36:51 ADT
From: hull@cs.uri.edu (Tom Hull)
Subject: Origamigo - representations (origo)

In reply to Baz's inquiry, I don't think the approach I use in my math
research towards looking at origami will be of much help to you all.
I've been trying to make a mathematical model which will allow me to
discover properties of paperfolding. In doing this, it is always
desirable to keep your model *simple*, so that things don't get too
crazy too quickly. With this in mind, I made a definition:

DEF: An *origami* is a one-to-one piecewise-linear, piecewise isometry from
the unit square into R^3 (3-D space).

I think I can keep the definition this simple. Linear means "no curves."
Isometry means "can't stretch the paper", and one-to-one means "can't
have the paper tear through itself. OH YEAH, I forgot about continuity!
It has to be continuous too, so that the paper doesn't rip.

In this was, each origami is actually a function (or mapping). I describe
this function via the crease pattern, where I also put weights on
the crease lines to indicate how far, and in what direction, each is
to be folded.

As far as describing origami, that's all my model does. From there I
look at properties the crease pattern must have if, say, it makes a flat
origami.

Robert Lang has been working on this too, and his approach is different
from mine. While my approach can be described as mainly discrete, Lang
is trying to wrestle with a continuous model. I admitt, it's hard to
picture what this all means without reading our papers. If I ever have
time I'll try to share some of Lang's work with you all.

--------- Tom "burnt cheese wiz" Hull





Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 17:45:20 ADT
From: Brian Ewins <gapv64@udcf.gla.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: On-Line Origami (WWW Mosaic)

What you 'see' as pictures in WWW stuff is (usually) GIF,as they
support GIF 'inline' in documents. The Online Origami 'Zine
could be done this way. But, if you are using (eg) a Cello
browser on a Windows machine, URL's for _files_ such as the
Zine as it stands or the PostScript figures on the archive
go through a separate viewer- usually the one you would have
used anyway. I think this is true of Mosaic, and of products on
other machines too. (certainly true of the X-server I'm looking at).

IMHO, the 'zine would look great as a http page, but it would
increase the burden on the guy who's producing it, since most
people can't access the net this way and would still want it
in some other format.

        Also, WWW is only any good if you have a fast connection.

               Cheers,
                     Baz - 'jargon? what jargon?'





Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 20:27:27 ADT
From: Michael Thwaites <mjt@stubbs.ucop.edu>
Subject: RE: Origami, Plain and Simple and MATH

Tom

>RE: the origami-math talks
>     My paper "On the Mathematics of Flat Origamis" incompases the stuff
>I'll be talking about. I'm working on getting a copy put in the archives,
>but have had no luck. It's in LaTeX, with Mac pictures, and I haven't been
>able to get a EPS file to work on the Unix-style laser printer at school.
>I'll keep trying.

Please post the LaTeX version, or tell me where I can fetch it from, I can
handle LaTeX on my Mac.

Michael Thwaites, UC-DLA    <michael.thwaites@ucop.edu>





Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 20:45:46 ADT
From: Michael Thwaites <mjt@stubbs.ucop.edu>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

Rob

>I enjoyed Honda's book  ...  but eventually got tired of the fact that there
>were other materials involved, e.g. glue, and scissors.. that put me off a
>bit.

I'm glad to hear someone else say this. When I've look at an origami book,
if I see cutting going on it never leaves the book store. The other thing
that turns me off is if the pictures of the folded objects are decorated so
you know what they are ment to be. It just seems tacky to me.





Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 21:54:35 ADT
From: Michael Thwaites <mjt@stubbs.ucop.edu>
Subject: Re: On-Line Origami (WWW Mosaic)

Maarten van Gelder said:

>Via Mosaic it is also possible to access Gopher space. Our archives are in
>there.
>Try to look in the Netherlands (I don't know via what route) and then via
>'Groningen', 'University of Groningen', 'Rekencentrum/Computing center',
>'Anonymous FTP', 'Origami', ....

I got as far as Rekencentrum but I couldn't find either Computing center or
Anonymous FTP as options from there.

Michael Thwaites, UC-DLA    <michael.thwaites@ucop.edu>





Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 23:04:52 ADT
From: Soylent Green <rhudson@yorkcol.edu>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

Yeah, it's not only tacky, but not really origami!  Something else that ticks
me off, as in Kawai's little origami books, is the models he shows that he
doesn't give diagrams for.  Occasionally, in the roughly intelligible English
translation, i'll find mumbles of mentions of ways to approach the undiagrammed
models, but the task is largely undoable.  I've got a pretty good eye for
catching the little "scissors" symbol in the books, and the cut lines..

I think there should be an Origami Regulatory Agency.. in order to have the
origami "seal" placed on your book, you should have it rated for cuts and glue
and approved by the ONSI (like ANSI), the Origami National Standards Institute.
:)

Rob





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 04:09:32 ADT
From: msolinas@netcom.com (Michael Solinas)
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

> I'm glad to hear someone else say this. When I've look at an origami book,
> if I see cutting going on it never leaves the book store. The other thing
> that turns me off is if the pictures of the folded objects are decorated so
> you know what they are ment to be. It just seems tacky to me.

Ditto for me.  Origami, to me, is folding - period.  Cutting, glue, etc
destroy the purity of the art.  Call those creations "paper art" - fine.
But it doesn't seem like origami to me.





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 11:11:18 ADT
From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

> Ditto for me.  Origami, to me, is folding - period.  Cutting, glue, etc
> destroy the purity of the art.  Call those creations "paper art" - fine.
> But it doesn't seem like origami to me.

Are you people serious? "Destroying the purity of the art..." Do you know
that there are folk out there that feel the same way about folding from
paper that is not square. There are even others who say that anything more
than mountain and valley folds is not origami. Again I ask: Who decides? Or
is it just up to each individuals taste?
This is beginning to sound like some religious arguments :-)

 >>><<<Sheldon Ackerman>>><<<
>>ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org<<





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 12:33:50 ADT
From: Brian Ewins <gapv64@udcf.gla.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

I believe we should have only plain white squares
and not be allwed to fold or cut them. Beauty lies
in simplicity and symmetry.

        There's scope for a book here - 'Pure Origami' Models include - 'the
plain white square' 'the white square rotated 45 degrees', 'a larger square',
and there'll be a lengthy intoduction on whether or not off-white can be
tolerated. 

        I was going to write a program to demonstrate 'the p.w.s.' but when I
realized the monitor would curve my squares slightly I stopped for aesthetic
reasons. 

Those purists who print this message out will be delighted to find a montage
of white squares on a white background towards the bottom of the page. 

I think I've done this joke to death now so I'll stop.
               Baz.





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 12:50:30 ADT
From: Doug Philips <dwp+@transarc.com>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

Sheldon Ackerman wrote:

+Are you people serious? "Destroying the purity of the art..." Do you know
+that there are folk out there that feel the same way about folding from
+paper that is not square. There are even others who say that anything more
+than mountain and valley folds is not origami. Again I ask: Who decides? Or
+is it just up to each individuals taste?
+This is beginning to sound like some religious arguments :-)

Hear! Hear!

;-)
Doesn't everyone know that Origami was invented long before paper was?
Back then there was nothing but Theoretical Origami, so the
"Theoretical" adjective wasn't needed.  With the invention of paper,
some practioners fell from True Origami into the heretical
Practical/Applied Origami cult.  [It should be noted in passing that
True Origami was ancient in Plato's time, and is widely considered to
have been the basis of his ideas about Forms.]

Now, sadly, there are few True Origamians left, and of those, even
fewer still practice the rigors of folding with their minds, perfectly
two dimensional squares.
;-)

(Inspiration for this satire goes to Jim Troester, a folding-challenged
 coworker whose pursuit of Truth and Purity of Art (esp. of the Art of
 Leadership) is a constant inspiration to those around him.)

-Doug





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 14:00:37 ADT
From: AHELM@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd

>Are you people serious? "Destroying the purity of the art..." Do you know
>that there are folk out there that feel the same way about folding from
>paper that is not square. There are even others who say that anything more
>than mountain and valley folds is not origami. Again I ask: Who decides? Or
>is it just up to each individuals taste?
>This is beginning to sound like some religious arguments :-)

Oh how the voice of the purists rise up to defend their pure ideal!  Please
don't turn this into some kind of Holy War!  Chill out.

I understand the purist's argument that there shalt not be any cuts.  After
all, this is ORI (fold)  KAMI(paper) we are talking about.  Nevertheless, you
cannot deny the brilliance of models (such as the shell models in
_Connoiseur_) which may involve a snip here or there.  I mean, hey, Kasahara
     thought it was worth showing.

Remember, however, that there are many different people who come to this art in
many ways.  A child may first come to it through a beginning book  with cute
models, even ones with faces marked on them to appeal to a child.  An artist
may  come to it in experimenting with many aspects and opportunities available
with a paper medium.   Give these people a break and don't go preaching.  Couch
your arguments with "IMHO" or  "as for me" or "some people believe," etc.
Let's not scare off those new to the art.  Give them some breathing room until
they are as good as you!

Oh and as for paper size--sure a square presents a unique challenge, but you
cannot deny the achievements made in ORIGAMI by varying paper size and shape.

Please, people.  Count to 10. Relax.  Share.  Enjoy.  Teach.  But don't preach.

Cheers,
Anthony Helm
ahelm@utxsvs.cc.utexas.edu





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 15:21:26 ADT
From: Kathryn Dudley <kdudley@isnet.is.wfu.edu>
Subject: Origami paper

Where are the favorite places to get paper?  I have tried just a few
places (bookstores, art supply, etc.)  with no luck.  Could there be a
catalog out there?

Already ducking from fear of being called a heretic, I humbly ask:  could I
use magazine pages just for practicing? <8-o

I know this town is fairly small...I just didn't realize HOW small! %-I





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 15:48:54 ADT
From: CSTEFFAN@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

I was relieved to see all the humor about this - I was beginning to feel
like - Who died and made you God?  But it does explain something to me.
In my extreme naivete, I took Joseph Wu's suggestion and got the one Biddles'
book. Joseph neglected to caution me about Pure Origami and thinking that the
dragon on the cover looked like fun, I went ahead and made it. It uses BOTH
cutting AND gluing. Now I know why they all moved away from me on the Group
W bench at the Ann Arbor Origami meeting. Next meeting, I'll wear a scarlet
A (for Adulterer of Pure Origami - but don't worry, I've learned my lesson -
I won't cut the A, I'll fold it) and beg the group's forgiveness. Thanks for
the enlightenment.





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 16:10:52 ADT
From: larrys@zk3.dec.com
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

To me, origami is one end of a whole spectrum of paper crafts.  I just
recently picked up a book about another japanese paper art (I'm at work
and drawing a blank on the name, help me out here) wherein a series of
cuts are made into a flat sheet of paper and then a figure is folded up
from it, like a popup book or card.  This is good stuff.  So is paper-
mache, which is leaving the realm of folding and cutting and entering
the world of sculpture.  There are a lot of transitional forms, and
there is nothing wrong with them, really.

But for some of us, there is an appreciation of a purer form.  There are
_rules_ to certain kinds of art.  It isn't a sonnet or a limrick unless
it has the _form_ of a sonnet or limrick.  It might still be _poetry_,
but not a sonnet or limrick.  Origami has been around a long time, and
it's a bit nebulous what it really means, hence the "religious wars".

For myself, I am most interested in origami folded from square paper.
After that, I like folded from 8 1/2 x 11.  Then cuts and tape allowed.
Then I get into paper construction - cut-n-assemble stuff, like the clock
I've mentioned in this group, thence to slightly non-paper-related hobbies
like rocketry and for me, basically, it ends there - except for this new
interest coming off of origami, the popup stuff mentioned above.  Hobbies
are fun _because_ they lead to new things.  If you are interested in just
one form, that's fine, but it in no way degrades any other.  Sometimes
they have very entertaining overlaps, as when my long-standing interest
in fractals suddenly popped up a connection with origami, and that's also
part of the fun.

The word is a probability function, not an absolute.  When you find it
on a book, it implies that _some_ or _all_ of the contents _may_ fit
_your_ feeling of what origami is.  Maybe it would be nice if we had
standardized terms for all the forms of origami, but that is a topic
for another day.

Cordially,
Larry Smith
larrys@alpha.zk3.dec.com





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 16:26:55 ADT
From: Soylent Green <rhudson@yorkcol.edu>
Subject: Burn the witch! (puritanism)

The only form of Puritanism I follow is the no cut, no glue rule.. Odd sized
paper's all right, provided you don't cut out an eight-legged polygon and fold
it in half to make a spider!  Magazine pages make good stuff.. there's a great
magazine cover box you can make.. real easy stuff, too..

Rob
