




Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 17:29:09 ADT
From: Michael Thwaites <mjt@stubbs.ucop.edu>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd (puritanism)

>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.

I stand by what I said earlier - however, with some qualification. What I
was thinking of, although I did not make my self clear, was that there are
all too many papercraft books passing as origami. I don't object to them
any more than I object to other mild forms of noise, like passing cars. I
just don't buy those books. I don't throw stones at passing cars either.

There are some beautiful objects that are only possible with a few well
placed cuts. The cuts should not be a substitute for clever folding. I know
a nice fold of four pyramids out of one piece of paper that requires four
cuts. And I'm not ashamed of admitting it either.





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 18:54:21 ADT
From: AHELM@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu
Subject: origami architecture??? (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.

I believe you are referring to what is often called "origami architecture."
Though I am no purist, and though this does interest me to some degree, I do
not like the term as it is.  Many times I have done a computer search of
articles or books related to origami and this OA stuff is usually included,
sending me on a disappointing wild sheep chase (sorry, Japanese lit. ref.).

For me, "true origami architecture" should refer to modular works, folded
buildings, or things like the objet d'art.

IMHO, what is called now "origami architecture" should always be called, as it
     is in
some books, "pop up architecture."

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





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 20:14:54 ADT
From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org>
Subject: Re: 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

Which is the town you are referring to? I have generally found Origami paper
in hobby shops. If they don't have it, they know where to order it form. If
you are a member of FOCA you can also order paper through them.

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





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 22:08:58 ADT
From: LHODSDON@smith.smith.edu
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

Those people at the Ann Arbor Origami meeting fold _dollars_ so many
of them can't count themselves among the purist of the pure.  They
put up with me, and I not only do Origamic Architecture (pop-up cards
if you prefer) but I cut and glue polyhedral models (horrors!).

I'm struck by the pure/applied arguments--they sound like defenses of
mathematics.  Personally, I believe there's a place for all kinds.
There's an elegance to a pure mountain/valley fold out of a white
square that just isn't part of a modular (with cuts and glue in the
worst cases).  There's room for everyone as long as we understand
the hierarchy of pureness.

It's Paper Obsession -- pure and simple!!

Lisa Hodsdon
lhodsdon@smith.smith.edu





Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 22:18:55 ADT
From: LHODSDON@smith.smith.edu
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

Larry-
Have you found the book of pop-up cards based on fractals??
I don't know the name or author, but the publisher is Tarquin
It's not cheap, but I've been enjoying it.
Lisa Hodsdon
lhodsdon@smith.smith.edu





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 01:16:05 ADT
From: ab197@dayton.wright.edu (Warren R. Kearney Jr.)
Subject: No Cuts and other stuff

I've been enjoying the list and the comments about Honda's book. Yes this was
one of the ones I started with and enjoyed and still have. When I am asked to
teach Origami I will sometimes teach a model that uses a cut or two. I don't
think anyone is turning over in a grave! The real fun begins after I am sure
that everyone in the class xan do a fair job of repeating the folding steps
and reproduce the model, then I complment the class and thank them for their
time as I am doing this I am folding a new version of the model. One with out
cuts or glue or whatever. I've had people tell me they really got more
interrested in Origami after they've seen the new model. BUT they are very
glad that we started with the easier version.
Thanks to everyone for the interaction on this list. I love to fold and have
only been at it about 32 years.
Peace
Warren Kearney





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 08:35:33 ADT
From: Agnes Tomorrow <atom@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Shiite Origami

        I agree that to be 'real' origami, no cuts or glue can be
allowed.  As I said before, I also think there are some wonderful things
which can be made by cutting, folding and gluing.  However, I understand
the term 'origami' not to include them!  I'm still not clear about
modulars and folds which include more than one piece of paper--I tend to
feel that 'real' origami involves *one* sheet of paper only (of whatever
shape), no cuts.

        As far as materials--I often do a 'test run' out of magazine
paper or recycling typing/computer paper, to get the feel of the
folding and to see what parts of the paper are visible in the final
product (something I can't always visualize from diagrams), so I'll have
an idea what it might look like from different styles and patterns of
paper.  Then I go mad and fold it from lots of different papers!  It's
amazing to me how different a particular model can look when folded from
a different patterned paper!

Agnes Tomorrow
atom@u.washington.edu





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 09:58:08 ADT
From: urgias@tsmi19.sissa.it
Subject: pop-up cards based on fractals!

        Hi.
        I just read about a book of pop-up cards based on fractals
        (mail from Lisa Hodsdon lhodsdon@smith.smith.edu).

        Please, can someone help me to find author
        title and editor of that book?

        Thanks! :-)

               Luisa Urgias





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 10:07:09 ADT
From: Mark Morden <marmonk@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Origami paper

On Thu, 7 Apr 1994, Kathryn Dudley wrote:

> 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?
>
Here is a source for free patterned paper.  I discovered this while
trying to find the cashiers at one of the local mega-hardware stores.  I
wandered into the wallpaper section and lo and behold there were samples
of paper everywhere.  These were about 4" by 5" pieces so they had to be
snipped to be usable  (re: previous discussion on purity etc.).  The wall
paper is fairly thick, so you will have to limit the complexity of the
model.  Also, be sure it doesn't have adhesive on the back.  could get messy.

Mark Morden
marmonk@eskimo.com





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 10:13:45 ADT
From: Mark Morden <marmonk@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

On Thu, 7 Apr 1994 CSTEFFAN@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU wrote:

> 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.

Since you outted yourself, I will admit I have made that model many
times.  And I enjoyed myself doing it.  I couldn't help it, it was such a
cool looking model.  But, that's as far as I've strayed from the square
and whole of Pure Origami.  Okay, okay, I made the Biddle's airplane also
and I use un-square paper sometimes.  But that's it, honest.  Boy, I feel
better coming out about this.
;-)

Mark Morden
marmonk@eskimo.com





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 10:37:03 ADT
From: larrys@zk3.dec.com
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

>Since you outted yourself, I will admit I have made that model many
>times.  And I enjoyed myself doing it.  I couldn't help it, it was such a
>cool looking model.  But, that's as far as I've strayed from the square
>and whole of Pure Origami.  Okay, okay, I made the Biddle's airplane also
>and I use un-square paper sometimes.  But that's it, honest.  Boy, I feel
>better coming out about this.

Infidel!  The Origami Mullahs will rip your pancreas out for this!
Using a properly-folded paper knife, I expect.  But they are using
_real_stiff_ paper for it!  Just as soon as they figure out Montroll's
fold for it.

:)

Larry Smith
larrys@alpha.zk3.dec.com





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 12:38:14 ADT
From: Agnes Tomorrow <atom@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: pop-up cards based on fractals!

On Fri, 8 Apr 1994 urgias@tsmi19.sissa.it wrote:

>       I just read about a book of pop-up cards based on fractals
>       (mail from Lisa Hodsdon lhodsdon@smith.smith.edu).
>
>       Please, can someone help me to find author
>       title and editor of that book?

        I find it difficult to imagine folding fractals...If this
information comes through, be sure to share it with the list!

Agnes Tomorrow
atom@u.washington.edu





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 13:19:22 ADT
From: Soylent Green <rhudson@yorkcol.edu>
Subject: huzzah! (puritanism)

Exactly!  The word origami, by definition, should be used to describe FOLDED
paper art, no cutting or glue, or staples.  You wouldn't call a taco "pizza",
or insist that anyone who put chocolate pudding on a squished pile of wax beans
was engaging in a Thanksgiving dinner, now would you?

Rob, "slightly addled"





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 14:11:39 ADT
From: LHODSDON@smith.smith.edu
Subject: Re: pop-up cards based on fractals!

I started this, so I guess I _really should_ find the actual reference.
The book is called _Fractal Cuts_, but I still forgot to look at the author.
I found it at a science/education toy store.  I have rarely found anything
by Tarquin in a "real" bookstore--too expensive and too specific to those
of us with interest in geometric/math models and such.

But, it seems that there are more of us than book-sellers believe.  If you
can't get it through your bookstore, I can try to find information about
ordering it through a catalog.  (I've done it, but I've moved since, so the
info may be in the barn in Maine rather than in my file cabinet in MA. :) )

And if you are interested in polyhedral models, do you know about Magnus
Wenniger's _Polyhedral Models_ and _Spherical Models_??  Way cool stuff!!
He gives all the information needed to make some really wild and complex
models -- along with the best method for scoring and gluing that I have
run across.  (Oops, should have warned the purists to put their blinders on)

I've found though, that modular origami is so much faster that I'be pretty
much stopped building models.  Maybe someday when I'm rich and have time
I'll go back to that hobby.

Lisa Hodsdon
lhodsdon@smith.smith.edu





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 14:45:29 ADT
From: GURKEWITZ@WCSUB.CTSTATEU.EDU
Subject: fractals and origami

I called my local bookstore to do a lookup on this book and found the
following:

Fractal Cuts by Tarquin Press
The distributor described the models as a combination of cutting and
folding

It's available from Park West Publications, 451 Communipah Avenue,
Jersey City, New Jersey 07304 $17.95 + 3.75 sh + tax





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 15:31:49 ADT
From: LHODSDON@smith.smith.edu
Subject: fractal answer & frog request

The author of _Fractal Cuts_ is Diego Uribe, Publisher is Tarquin, c.1993.

Tarquin says in the book that you can get their catalog from:
Tarquin Publications, Stradbroke, Diss, Norfolk, IP21 5JP, England,
though the Park West address in another post is probably better for
us Americans.

The book is designed to be cut up--patterns for the cards are meant
to be cut out, cut and scored and glued to the included backings.
I prefer to copy them onto my own paper.  If you are new to pop-up,
these patterns will be annoying because the score lines do not
indicate whether folds are mountain or valley (imagine!).  I prefer
to score with a knife instead of a pen so the direction of the fold
affects whether the score is on the front or the back of the card.

Let the buyer beware!  (The cards are great all the same.)

I have a question...
I am designing a class statistics project in which we are going to
study the relation of paper size to jumping frog jump length.  With
all this discussion of pure origami, I decided to look for a frog
folded from a square to use instead of the "traditional" business
card frog.

The only one I found is in the Friends 1991 Convention Collection by
Dan Torpey: "American Jumping frog with mouth"  If I folded it right,
it doesn't jump well enough for my needs.

Any suggestions?  Anyone know what I might be doing wrong with the
above frog?  (It's a very pretty frog--I like its looks, it's just
not springy enough out of standard paper.)

Thanks for your help!

Lisa Hodsdon
lhodsdon@smith.smith.edu





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 16:20:09 ADT
From: Charlotte <CSTEFFAN@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>
Subject: Re: fractal answer & frog request

I haven't folded that frog but I have folded one that's very simple and I
think jumps pretty well. I can't remember the name of the book it was in; I'll
have to check at home for it. I just had a book from the library by Kenneway
that had a Japanese frog, a Chinese frog and an American frog. Complete
Origami is the title (I think). Maybe you should have a multi-national
long jump competition between types of frog instead.
                                                   Charlotte





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 17:47:54 ADT
From: hull@cs.uri.edu (Tom Hull)
Subject: RE : Frog request

Hey! ANother chance to plug my book!
     A jumping frog, folded from a square, can be found in _Origami, Plain and
Simple_ (by Robert Neale and me). A very similar one can be found in John
Montroll's _Easy Origami_. (It is indeed strange that Montroll chose to write
a book called _Easy Origami_, but it's an OK book.)

     BUT LISA (if that is the person who made this request), be careful
when you fold your frogs for this statistics project!!!!! All paper has a
NATURAL GRAIN to it, which always runs down the square.

"WHAT???" you say? Well, take a square of origami paper, unfolded, and
cradle it in your hands. Gently, without actually folding the paper, bend
the square so that the opposite sides touch together. As you do this, notice
the tension in the paper.
     THEN rotate the square 90 degrees, and repeat this process.
     ONE of the times you did this, you should have noticed that the tension
was substantially weaker than the other time. This change in tension is caused
by the grain in the paper (which is just a by-product of the face that all
paper is made of wood).

"So what does this have to do with my statistics project??" Well, when you
fold a jumping frog, IF YOU FOLD THE FROG SO THAT ITS "SPRING" IS FOLDED
AGAINST THE GRAIN, then the frog will jump *farther* than it would if you
had folded the "spring" WITH the grain.

     Does that make sense? I hope so.
     In conclusion, in order for your experiment to be more statistically
sound, you'd better fold all your frogs against the grain (or all with the
grain), so that no frog will be unfairly advantaged.

---------------- Tom "the grand puba" Hull





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 20:19:38 ADT
From: "Micheal R. Tramont" <mtramont@vela.acs.oakland.edu>
Subject: Re: RE : Frog request

As a statistician, I can't but help to put my 2 cents in:

I'm not sure what kind of "stats project" is being planned, but Tom Hull's
suggestion of the paper grain being an important factor in regard to frog
jumping distance only makes the "project" more interesting--not less
"statistically sound".  (This is a great example that expert knowledge of
the product/process/etc. is essential when planning a statistical study!)

Paper Grain/Paper Orientation can be included in the project as a factor
to be studied.  Its effect can either be statistically significant or
insignificant.

I'm very interested in the outcome of your project, so please email the
list (if you can) of your results.  I have used paper helecopters in the
teaching of basic stats--perhaps the use of origami frogs would be a fun
variation (no pun intented!).

Micheal Tramont





Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 23:54:35 ADT
From: lcasey@koko.csustan.edu (Linda Casey)
Subject: Re: Origami paper

magazines make beautiful origami.  What town are you speaking of?

linda casey
Modesto, CA





Date: Sat, 9 Apr 94 13:00:11 ADT
From: LHODSDON@smith.smith.edu
Subject: paper grain and frogs

Tom-
I _knew_ about paper grain, but your reminder made me realize that
I forgot to mention this factor in my methods--I planned to control
for this, but forgot to make that control _explicit_ --Thanks

Actually, I think I will try Michael's suggestion, and test "with the
grain" frogs against "against the grain" frogs rather than different
frogs.  I've found that the differences between jump length in the
frogs I have tried is too obvious to be really interesting.

I will certainly let the list know the results, which I am sure will
affect us all...  Is it really important that we consider the orientation
of the paper grain when making jumping frogs?  The world needs to know!!

Michael-
What did you do with your paper airplanes?

Lisa
lhodsdon@smith.smith.edu





Date: Sat, 9 Apr 94 13:37:12 ADT
From: Elaine Rhodes <erhodes@camelot.bradley.edu>
Subject: Re: paper grain and frogs

>I _knew_ about paper grain, but your reminder made me realize that
>I forgot to mention this factor in my methods--I planned to control
>for this, but forgot to make that control _explicit_ --Thanks
>
>I will certainly let the list know the results, which I am sure will
>affect us all...  Is it really important that we consider the orientation
>of the paper grain when making jumping frogs?  The world needs to know!!

Don't forget to apply for a grant first....       :-)

Elaine Rhodes   erhodes@camelot.bradley.edu





Date: Sat, 9 Apr 94 16:31:05 ADT
From: Agnes Tomorrow <atom@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: paper grain and frogs

        The jumping frog I know (which I learned in a History of
Psychiatry class when it came jumping down the table to me...) involves
paper 1/2 square long (or two--same difference...), and is a *very* good
jumper--if you'd like instructions, I can probably do it by
internet--it's very easy!
        I'll have to investigate the paper grain/spring theory... BTW, the
reason paper has a grain is because the fibers in the pulp will tend to
flow in the direction the fluid runs off...to verify this, try tearing
newspaper in one direction and then the other--in one direction, it tears
cleanly along an almost straight line, in the other it's difficult to
tear at all and keeps trying to 'go with the flow'...

Agnes Tomorrow
atom@u.washington.edu





Date: Sat, 9 Apr 94 17:40:31 ADT
From: Brian Ewins <gapv64@udcf.gla.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: fractal answer & frog request

Hi,
        A Chinese lady here just showed me a frog she
learned as a child - folded from a waterbomb base, it's
really simple and uses the 'Z' shaped spring mechanism
I've seen on other frogs. She made it out of newsprint
because she said that was better for making it jump.
Since the paper's so light, it gives a really nice
imitation of the ungainly flop that frogs actually do:
while the model is recognisable, the jump shouts
'I'M A FROG' in six-inch red capitals. Anyway, try
newspaper - maybe that's the secret.

               Baz.





Date: Sat, 9 Apr 94 19:26:15 ADT
From: Brian Ewins <gapv64@udcf.gla.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Newsgroup

Hi,
        I've started the ball rolling towards the newsgroup thang.
I've written to the people to handle these things for advice on
writing a charter; once I get a reply, hopefully in the next week
or so, I'll kick off further discussion with a RFD: containing
a _draft_ charter (I dont expect it to be right first time), hopefully
leading to a call for votes (CFV) in about a months time, and all
being well, a group will be formed in about 2 months time.
        This seems like a long time (well it does to me - I may
have a real job & lose my net.access by then) but if we follow
the rules, thats what it takes, and we're more likely to get the
group distributed by doing so.

        Hold your fire on this until the charter pops into your
mail box: it will be for 'rec.crafts.paper.misc', but more
groups can be proposed if desired.

               Cheers,
                     Baz.





Date: Sat, 9 Apr 94 20:05:40 ADT
From: Laurence.Biederman@um.cc.umich.edu
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

>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.

Charlotte --
    Well, I'll be the first AASO member to accept your apology.  I think
that the judge might reduce your punishment to 10 years of cutting cardboard
for your sins.

>Those people at the Ann Arbor Origami meeting fold _dollars_ so many
>of them can't count themselves among the purist of the pure.  They
>put up with me, and I not only do Origamic Architecture (pop-up cards
>if you prefer) but I cut and glue polyhedral models (horrors!).

Lisa --
    I'v just been getting into folding dollars because of the many dollar
bill folders at AASO, including Bill Dollar (yes, that is the man's name!).

--Lar





Date: Sun, 10 Apr 94 06:54:35 ADT
From: GURKEWITZ@WCSUB.CTSTATEU.EDU
Subject: re: frog and statistics

Ranana Benjamin told me that she uses the jumping frog to teach
statistics. But what I remember her saying was that she makes a frog
AND a magazine box (or has the students make them) Then they have a
contest on how many times they can get the frog to jump into the box
and keep statistics on this activity.

Rona Gurkewitz
gurkewitz@wcsub.ctstateu.edu





Date: Sun, 10 Apr 94 16:21:11 ADT
From: The Patient One <chupenr@minerva.cis.yale.edu>
Subject: Printing postscript

Help!  I tried again to print some more of the postscript files from the
origami archive, but ran into the same problems I had a couple weeks ago.
My computer croaks up the message "Not a valid postscript file" on some of
them, and attempts to print others but then tells me that there is some
kind of error at the last minute.  Some of the files I've had problems
with are the dragon, basket, gearweel, diplodoc (what is this anyway?
I've been dying to find out, but got so frustrated due to the printing
problems), heart, bill, armadillo, caterpillar.  The files that I have
successfully printed out are:  praying mantis, peacock, bull, crysrose.
Has anyone had similar problems?

Thanks, Maarten, for responding to my first post.  I hope you can figure
this one out!

Penny

Penelope Chua   Biology Dept., Yale University   chupenr@minerva.cis.yale.edu





Date: Sun, 10 Apr 94 19:32:26 ADT
From: Jae Hyuk Lee <jaelee@WPI.EDU>
Subject: digest mode, Montroll's rhino, Kawasaki's rose

Hi everyone.  For a little change of pace from all the mailings
on programming language, the meaning/definition of origami, etc
that I have been reading (skipping over?),  I am writing about my
experience with folding since I joined the list.  I have a feeling
this might end up being a little long.

I wrote about 2 weeks ago asking everyone on the list
what a good beginner's book would be.  It's a little late but I thank
everyone who wrote in.  Based on the recommendations and after looking
through some of the archives, I decided to buy _Origami Omnibus_
and _Origami for the Connisseur_.  The local bookstores did not have
them in stock, so I placed an order for them and then bought a book that
they did have in stock, Montroll's _Origami for the Enthusiast_.

This was the first Origami book that I had ever bought or folded from.
As I flipped throught the book, it seemed to me *at the time* that the
models in the first half of the book were pretty simple.  I decided to
try folding the rhinoceros which looked quite interesting and challenging.
Since I was not familiar with any of the terminology, I studied the
first ten or so pages of the book which explained what mountain fold,
valley fold, etc were.  The terms were vaguely familiar from reading the
mailings from origami-l.

After I decided that I understood the basic folds and terminology, I
proceeded to fold the rhinoceros.  It was about 10 pm when I started.
The first 10 or so steps went smoothly enough.  And then...  things got
difficult.  I had the hardest time figuring out some of the steps.
Finally, I got stuck when I was about 80% done.  I looked up at the clock.
It was 1 am!!!  I couldn't believe it took me over 3 hours (Well.. I was
watching some TV at the same time...)   I was really tired and I wasn't
sure about the next folding step, so I gave up.  I guess I tried to do
too much on the first day of folding.  I suppose I ate some humble pie.
(Is that a correct expression?)

I was really busy with school for the next two weeks, so I did not do
any folding.  Then I received a postcard from the bookstore saying that
_Origami for the connisseur_ had come in.  I picked it up yesterday,
and proceeded straight to Kawasaki's rose which I had heard so much about
on origami-l.  It only had about 15 steps, so this was somewhat
encouraging to me.  I got to step 8 no problem.  Step 9 (twisting the
center square.  'Pretty neat,' I thought) was a little tricky but I got
through it.

And then... I got stuck.  I wasn't sure how step 10 was done.  "How can
you twist all four parts at the same time to get a curvy shape?" I said
to myself.  I struggled for over an hour, and, after fumbling and twisting,
the model looked somewhat similar to the picture.  I looked at the clock
again.  1 am.  Memories of the rhinoceros came back to me, but I was
determined to finish the rose.  (If only I studied like that in school...)

It took me some time to figure out the next few steps, but at 1:30 am
I finally had the rose.  Although I was somewhat disappointed that there
was no fastening at the bottom portion, I felt that the four pointed ends
allowed the rose to be displayed easily on a flat surface.  And...  it was
a really good looking rose.  All white, but with realistic contours.

If you are still reading this,  there you have it.  My experience with the
first two models that I folded.  It was difficult but fun.  It will
probably be a few weeks again until I can fold another model.

BTW, I set the mailing to "digest mode" like someone suggested, and I like
it.  It clearly identifies who sent the mail, and I also don't have to sort
through 10 to 30 messages.  Try it.

That's it for today.  Thanks for reading.  Sorry it was too long.  8-)

                               Jae Lee
                               jaelee@wpi.edu





Date: Sun, 10 Apr 94 20:52:58 ADT
From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org>
Subject: Re: digest mode, Montroll's rhino, Kawasaki's rose

>
> I was really busy with school for the next two weeks, so I did not do
> any folding.  Then I received a postcard from the bookstore saying that
> _Origami for the connisseur_ had come in.  I picked it up yesterday,
> and proceeded straight to Kawasaki's rose which I had heard so much about
> on origami-l.  It only had about 15 steps, so this was somewhat
> encouraging to me.  I got to step 8 no problem.  Step 9 (twisting the
> center square.  'Pretty neat,' I thought) was a little tricky but I got
> through it.
>
> And then... I got stuck.  I wasn't sure how step 10 was done.  "How can
> you twist all four parts at the same time to get a curvy shape?" I said
> to myself.  I struggled for over an hour, and, after fumbling and twisting,
> the model looked somewhat similar to the picture.  I looked at the clock
> again.  1 am.  Memories of the rhinoceros came back to me, but I was
> determined to finish the rose.  (If only I studied like that in school...)
>
> It took me some time to figure out the next few steps, but at 1:30 am
> I finally had the rose.  Although I was somewhat disappointed that there
> was no fastening at the bottom portion, I felt that the four pointed ends
> allowed the rose to be displayed easily on a flat surface.  And...  it was
> a really good looking rose.  All white, but with realistic contours.
>
> If you are still reading this,  there you have it.  My experience with the
> first two models that I folded.  It was difficult but fun.  It will
> probably be a few weeks again until I can fold another model.

That's how it usually is with the more complicated models. Perseverance pays
off. I'll work on one for hours, put it down, pick it up a day or so later
and find that I am able to complete it.

> BTW, I set the mailing to "digest mode" like someone suggested, and I like
> it.  It clearly identifies who sent the mail, and I also don't have to sort
> through 10 to 30 messages.  Try it.
>
What is DIGEST MODE ????

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





Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 00:45:35 ADT
From: r.follmer@genie.geis.com
Subject: ORIGAMI-L digest 47

The paper grain thoery and how it bends readily in one direction and not the
other was the basis for one of the most perplexing magic tricks to come down
the pike in many a moon.  The originator of the effect showed it to me
before it was on the market.  It was called the Fillman Principle.  Perhaps
some of you magicians remember this winner!

++++++++++

Charlotte:

An "A" would not be proper..... perhaps a scarlet "OOO" for Original Origami
Odulterer!   :)

Bob





Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 05:12:10 ADT
From: arien kismet del'tai <arien@blegga.omnigroup.com>
Subject: Re: On-Line Origami (WWW Mosaic)

> I have tried it here in Groningen. Using WinMosaic I get

> the same problem.  Using Xmosaic you will get through.

> But with WinMosaic you can work around the problem. You

> may access the origami directory via:
>
>   Open URL:

> gopher://risc1.rug.nl:70/11/rc/rcinfo/origami

By way of a fyi (the program itself is free), since the
more people that can easily access Online Origami, the
better ;)  ...

For those of you on NeXTSTEP-running machines, there's now
a way to easily access World Wide Web: OmniWeb.  You can
get it by joining the OmniWeb beta-test mailing list.  To
do this, send mail to listproc@omnigroup.com saying:

        subscribe OmniWeb-l <YourFirstName> <YourLastName>

This is something my SO is working on (he's why my
account's on omnigroup), and I like it a lot.  It's
smooth-running, and best of all, I don't have to use a Mac.
:)  How long has World Wide Web really been up, anyway?  It
really reminds me of Things Out Of SF Novels (tm).

                              Ari.





Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 09:55:48 ADT
From: Brian Ewins <gapv64@udcf.gla.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Printing postscript

Hi,
        The problem with most of the files that you mention
is that they don't contain 'DSC' comments. These are the ones
that tell other programs (_not_ a PS interpreter) where
page breaks are, what fonts are needed in the document, etc.
They're sort of a courtesy to people who have to handle
the stuff later, so it can be printed 2 sided, or with
different fonts, or 2 'pages' to a page, etc.
        If your PS interpreter complains because these
are missing, it's broken. More likely, is  that there is
some filter (eg psnup,ps2ps) being used to alter the page
order: this _will_not_work_. Check to see if your printer
driver is using an option like this.
        Another possibility is that you are trying to put
these files into (eg) MS Word before printing. Programs
which aren't real PS interpreters (unlike eg Freedom of
the Press, GhostScript) can only use special PS files called
Encapsulated PostScript (EPS). These should _never_ have
more than one page; that's not what they're for. The solution
for you if you're doing this is: don't.
        The ones that have worked for you are ones which
contain one page per file, or have the right comments.

               Hope this helps.
                     Baz.





Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 17:46:38 ADT
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

On Thu, 7 Apr 1994 CSTEFFAN@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU wrote:

> 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.

IMHO, "pure origami" is merely a branch of origami as a whole. As many
people have point out, origami is paper folding--no mention is made of
whether or not cutting or gluing is allowed. I like to fold from uncut
squares whenever possible, but sometimes that's just not the best way. I
do avoid cutting, however. To quote Michael Shall, "There are no origami
police." Gluing is another matter--anyone who has done backcoating knows
that using paste is essential.

In my defense, I recommended the books by the Biddles and by Paul Jackson
as good books for learning the basics of origami. They present in a
logical and systematic way the techniques you will need to know as you
progress in folding prowess. Some of the models (such as the dragon
mentioned above) in the Biddles' book require cutting and gluing. And I
must admit that I was diappointed in them too (especially considering that
I do a much nicer dragon from an uncut square). Anyway, I don't think
anyone should be ostracized for cutting or gluing...I'm disappointed by
the Ann Arbor group for doing so.

To summarize: I am somewhat of a purist, but I recognize the beauty of
paperfolding in general.





Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 18:11:45 ADT
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: origami architecture???

On Thu, 7 Apr 1994 AHELM@orange.cc.utexas.edu wrote:

> I believe you are referring to what is often called "origami architecture."
> Though I am no purist, and though this does interest me to some degree, I do
> not like the term as it is.  Many times I have done a computer search of
> articles or books related to origami and this OA stuff is usually included,
> sending me on a disappointing wild sheep chase (sorry, Japanese lit. ref.).
>
> For me, "true origami architecture" should refer to modular works, folded
> buildings, or things like the objet d'art.
>
> IMHO, what is called now "origami architecture" should always be called, as
     it is in
> some books, "pop up architecture."

The term that Chatani uses is "origamic architecture". I agree that it
should more properly be called "pop-up architecture". I believe that
Chatani (or his editors/translators) were trying to cash in on the word
"origami" which many westerners associate with Japanese paper crafts.
Anything to make a bigger profit, I guess! 8)





Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 18:21:27 ADT
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: Origami paper

On Fri, 8 Apr 1994, Mark Morden wrote:

> Here is a source for free patterned paper.  I discovered this while
> trying to find the cashiers at one of the local mega-hardware stores.  I
> wandered into the wallpaper section and lo and behold there were samples
> of paper everywhere.  These were about 4" by 5" pieces so they had to be
> snipped to be usable  (re: previous discussion on purity etc.).  The wall
> paper is fairly thick, so you will have to limit the complexity of the
> model.  Also, be sure it doesn't have adhesive on the back.  could get messy.

I've never tried it, but I suspect that wallpaper would be great for
wet-folding.





Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 18:47:53 ADT
From: Charlotte <CSTEFFAN@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

Joseph - I was joking about the Ann Arbor group moving away from me on the
Group W bench. They're a really open-minded bunch and although one or two
people did come by, look at my dragon and move on, some of them liked it a
lot. I like the Biddles book; they do some less than pure origami but I
think the organization around the different bases and what you can fold
from them is a good idea for beginners and that's what you recommended it
for. I'm too new at this to be a purist yet, although I do find that I prefer
a lot of the simpler folds, not because they're easier but I like what's
created from just a few folds. What dragon from an uncut square are you refer-
ring to? I'd be interested by way of comparison.





Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 19:05:19 ADT
From: Brad Blumenthal <brad@eecs.uic.edu>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

I get the shudders whenever anyone mentions origami "purism;" it
smacks of methodology (the difference between a methodologist and a
terrorist is that you can negotiate with a terrorist).  However, I
just thought I'd stick my oar in.

First, in defense of cutting and multi-part models and so on: There is
a story about John Montroll, that John himself flatly denies, but it's
good enough that it should be true (I heard both the story and the
denial in John's zebra session at the 1990 convention).  As the myth
goes, John had a an origami book when he was about 5 or so, and he
worked his way through all the models.  He wasn't old enough to read
the directions, but he was determined, so he kept working on it until
he could fold all of the models from a single square sheet of paper.
What he didn't know was that most of the models in the book were built
from more than one piece of paper.

Second, just to put this purism nonsense into perspective, we had part
of this discussion back in January of '89.  Here are some of Eric
Kenneway's (from _Complete Origami_) collected rules for real purity
in origami:

  -- Only use one piece of paper; no compound or modular folds
  -- Never use tape or glue (yes, it's obvious, but if you ignore the
one-piece of paper rule, this makes things interesting -- all pieces
must interlock naturally).
  -- Only use square paper
  -- Only use square paper that is between 3 and 5 inches on a side
(let's get picky)
  -- Only use your hands - no tools (toothpicks, bone folders,
tweezers, etc.)
  -- Never undo a fold, thus the model always gets smaller as you work
(all you folks that thought you were real purists, take note -- no
precreasing, no pulling out concealed bits of paper).

The more things change....

Take care,
brad





Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 19:21:22 ADT
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: No cuts allow'd! (puritanism)

On Mon, 11 Apr 1994, Charlotte wrote:

> Joseph - I was joking about the Ann Arbor group moving away from me on the
> Group W bench. They're a really open-minded bunch and although one or two
> people did come by, look at my dragon and move on, some of them liked it a
> lot. I like the Biddles book; they do some less than pure origami but I
> think the organization around the different bases and what you can fold
> from them is a good idea for beginners and that's what you recommended it
> for. I'm too new at this to be a purist yet, although I do find that I prefer
> a lot of the simpler folds, not because they're easier but I like what's
> created from just a few folds. What dragon from an uncut square are you refer-
> ring to? I'd be interested by way of comparison.

Ah...my apologies to AASO.

The dragon I'm talking about is my own. I was working on diagramming it
when my computer went down, so it's on hold right now. It is somewhat
similar to Robert Neale's dragon, however.





Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 19:33:45 ADT
From: jadr@oce.nl (J. Adriaanse)
Subject: help wanted on pictorial origami

Hi everybody,

Can anybody tell me more about a technique called 'pictorial origami'?

In 'Complete Origami' Eric Kenneway mentions Bob Allen as the inventor. It
is a technique of making flat pictures consisting of creases.

There is an example in the book where a piece of paper is folded in three
strips. Then the outer strips are folded and creased to make a picture
against the background of the middle strip.

Greetings,

Sjaak Adriaanse





Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 04:01:54 ADT
From: urgias@tsmi19.sissa.it
Subject: pop-up cards based on fractals! ... Thanks all!

        Hi all!
        I'm answering to some of all the people that sent an answer
        aboout pop-up based on fractals!

        Thanks to all!!!

               Luisa

1)

>       I find it difficult to imagine folding fractals...If this
> information comes through, be sure to share it with the list!
>
> Agnes Tomorrow
> atom@u.washington.edu

No Agnes! Using pop-up these are a little number of folds, but
...lots of cuts!
Yes, it is NOT origami, but ....a branch of japanese paper arts!

...I had some difficulty to submit this kind of
request.... after all discussions about "no cuts allowed"!!!

2)

> From: GURKEWITZ@WCSUB.CTSTATEU.EDU
>
> I called my local bookstore to do a lookup on this book and found the
> following:
>
> Fractal Cuts by Tarquin Press
> The distributor described the models as a combination of cutting and
> folding
>
> It's available from Park West Publications, 451 Communipah Avenue,
> Jersey City, New Jersey 07304 $17.95 + 3.75 sh + tax

Thank you!

3)

> From: LHODSDON@smith.smith.edu
>
> The author of _Fractal Cuts_ is Diego Uribe, Publisher is Tarquin, c.1993.
>
> Tarquin says in the book that you can get their catalog from:
> Tarquin Publications, Stradbroke, Diss, Norfolk, IP21 5JP, England,
> though the Park West address in another post is probably better for
> us Americans.

Thank you very much! I will try to get the catalog: I see other
book published by Tarquin about geometry and similar!

> The book is designed to be cut up--patterns for the cards are meant
> to be cut out, cut and scored and glued to the included backings.
> I prefer to copy them onto my own paper.  If you are new to pop-up,
> these patterns will be annoying because the score lines do not
> indicate whether folds are mountain or valley (imagine!).  I prefer
> to score with a knife instead of a pen so the direction of the fold
> affects whether the score is on the front or the back of the card.

No, I'm not new to pop-up but I did'n know about fractal-pop-up!

Luisa





Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 04:33:31 ADT
From: urgias@tsmi19.sissa.it
Subject: RE : Frog request

Hi all!

First of all:
I'm sorry, but I sent two times the same
mail with two different subjects: the second one is the right one!
It will never more happens!!!

        Hi Lisa.
        You can get a list of books containing frog folds
        via anonymous/ftp at: rugcis.rug.nl
        The file is dbindex.txt.
        I hope it will help you.

               Luisa Urgias





Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 04:36:53 ADT
From: lynn@pharmdec.wustl.edu (pamplemousse)
Subject: ftp site

hello all, i just joined this list.

someone mentioned the existence of a site with instructions
for origami designs .. i think i popped in the middle of the
exchange. where is this site? i'd like to take a look.

i have been folding origami on and off. i must admit that
most of my designs involve cutting pieces of paper and
assembling them, though i adhere to a set of rules along the lines
of 'Able To Be Assembled In The Mojave Desert.' Scissors,
jacknife or razor required, but no adulterations with glue or tape.
i also only cut away paper to leave a single fragment for assembly
into the object...

i have made a series of designs of 'cut objects' by myself and
other people around the net avaiable from a WWW home page.

        http://oz.sas.upenn.edu/lynn/lynn.html
        'jardin mechanisme'
        click to *Free Art For The Masses*





Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 07:22:05 ADT
From: Bruce Stephens <bruce@liverpool.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Making diagrams (origo)

> 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.

There shouldn't really be any dispute here.  There are freely available
tools (yacc, for example) which make it easy to write programs which
can understand things like the above and process it internally in
whatever form you want.  The difficult bit is manipulating the paper,
to work out what on earth a particular stage looks like, taking into
account the layering and other constraints.

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

Bruce                   Institute of Advanced Scientific Computation
bruce@liverpool.ac.uk   University of Liverpool





Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 10:31:15 ADT
From: Soylent Green <rhudson@yorkcol.edu>
Subject: Origami Police (puritanism)

FREEZE!  You have been cited under title I, section 1 of the Origami Code,
which states clearly and specifically, "The spindling, cutting, or mutilating
of paper under the guise of Origami is not permissible under the law," and
title I, section 2, which states, "Paper may only adhere to itself, by it's own
natural properties, without the use of any bonding materials, including,
but not limited to the use of glue, sticky-pads, tape or lick-bond"

There is still a case in Origami court as to whether the use of the adhesive
properties of Post-It notes is permissible in origami.  One interesting
argument for its defense states that Post-It notes exist in sufficient
quantity, that despite their special properties, said characteristics MAY
 constitute a property of the notes.  Besides, it's very difficult to rub the
post-it part off to fold it, and they make great praying mantises (Origami Made
Easy, Kasahara)

Anyone else care to join in on "Kiri Vs. Ori, the Kami trial"?

Rob, prosecuting attorney.





Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 10:23:26 ADT
From: stamm@aol.com
Subject: Online Origami Digest & The Friend's Convention

I hope this isn't being presumptuous, but I would like to make a proposal
and would like to solicit your ideas.

I thought I would pull all my origami online resources into a digest that
could be ditributed freely (electronically, magnetically or photocopied
without fear of copyright).  I would like to include:

1) Instruction on how to acccess the Listserve addresses and the FTP site.
2) How to access the origami conversations on the outernets (AOL,
   CompuServe, Genie, Prodigy(ug!)... Any others?
3) V'ann's BBS and Bibliography Database.
4) Discussions on File formats (GIF, postscript, Digital Paper (Common
   Ground).
5) Reviews of digramming software.
6) And anything else that might be useful.

I would be willing to cordinate and a produce it.  My exprience involse
mostly Macintosh and some windows stuff.  If anyone would like to share the
expertise or have me include an article that would be great.

I has hoping this would be something I could have available for the
Friend's Convention (June 10).  Being a convention virgin( This will be my
first time) I'm not sure if this would be "appropriate" or if this is
duplicating someone else's efforts.  Perhaps this is something we could do
annually...

Just an Idea,
Tom "Too-old-to-fold, To-young-to-stop" Stamm





Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 11:46:26 ADT
From: urgias@tsmi19.sissa.it
Subject: Fractals, Polyhedral Models, etc.

Lisa Hodsdon wrote:

> From: LHODSDON@smith.smith.edu
> To: Multiple recipients of list <origami-l@nstn.ns.ca>
> Subject: Re: pop-up cards based on fractals!
> X-Listserver-Version: 6.0 -- UNIX ListServer by Anastasios Kotsikonas
>
> I started this, so I guess I _really should_ find the actual reference.
> The book is called _Fractal Cuts_, but I still forgot to look at the author.
> I found it at a science/education toy store.  I have rarely found anything
> by Tarquin in a "real" bookstore--too expensive and too specific to those
> of us with interest in geometric/math models and such.

I'm agree with you: I know some Tarquin book but I found them
in a puzzle-toy store ... in Zurich , Switzerland! ...

>
> But, it seems that there are more of us than book-sellers believe.  If you
> can't get it through your bookstore, I can try to find information about
> ordering it through a catalog.  (I've done it, but I've moved since, so the
> info may be in the barn in Maine rather than in my file cabinet in MA. :) )

No matter: do you read the mail to that list in which is write
where order a catalog of Tarquin editor?

>
> And if you are interested in polyhedral models, do you know about Magnus
> Wenniger's _Polyhedral Models_ and _Spherical Models_??  Way cool stuff!!
> He gives all the information needed to make some really wild and complex
> models -- along with the best method for scoring and gluing that I have
> run across.  (Oops, should have warned the purists to put their blinders on)

I'm very interested in polyhedral models, but I don't know (arghhh!)
Magnus Wenniger's _Polyhedral Models_ etc. Please, can you send me more infos?

>
> I've found though, that modular origami is so much faster that I'be pretty
> much stopped building models.  Maybe someday when I'm rich and have time
> I'll go back to that hobby.
>
> Lisa Hodsdon
> lhodsdon@smith.smith.edu

No, I love origami ....pure and ...not! (sorry for the purists!) and modular
origami is beautiful for me!

Thank you for all infos! ...where are you lkiving? I don't
understand from your address!

Luisa
