




Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 21:31:48 -0400
From: jdharris@teal.csn.net (Jerry D. Harris)
Subject: Re: R. Lang's - Crimps and pleats

>Well, I hope your red pens are not indelible, because step 17 of the Nautilus
>is indeed a pleat. The essential difference between a crimp and a pleat lies
>not the angle of the folds (more on this issue in a minute) but in the
>configuration of the raw edges of the paper (or the edges that would be
>exposed in a slice through the paper). In a pleat, all of the edges in the
>flap go the same direction; in a crimp, different layers go different ways.
>For example: in a two layered flap, look at the edges of the paper. If they
>look like this:
>
>--------
>-----  /
>    /  -----
>   ------
>
>it's a pleat. If they look like this:
>
>--------
>       /
>      -------
>      -------
>       \
>--------
>
>it's a crimp.

        I agree with all this, and I really like these text-line diagrams!
However, the statement

"The essential difference between a crimp and a pleat lies not the angle of
the folds...but in the
configuration of the raw edges of the paper (or the edges that would be
exposed in a slice through the paper). In a pleat, all of the edges in the
flap go the same direction; in a crimp, different layers go different
ways."

is, IMHO, erroneous.  The configuration of the paper is a function of the
angles of the fold lines, not vice versa!  That is to say, the only reason
that the paper is configured in such a way is _because_ of the orientations
of the fold lines...the converse would be that the fold lines exist only
because of the configuration of the paper -- one would have to somehow
manage to configure the paper without the geometry being inherent in the
move!  However, the geometry is inescapable; if you are folding the paper,
in any fashion (whether there are predefined lines or not), you are
imposing the paper into the preexisting geometries -- of which an infinite
varieties are possible.

        Trying to discuss this fine philosophical point is difficult to
illustrate, so let me try to find a simpler example.  Really, it's a matter
of which came first:  the chicken or the egg -- which comes first, the
lines (whether or not they exist as actual folds...I'm talking about
amongst the infinite number of lines that theoretically exist on any given
plane) or the configuration of the paper?  Using astronomy as an example:
the sun lies in a straight line from the Earth.  That line doesn't exist as
something tangible, with any substance, but the line exists nonetheless;
it's a function of the number of dimensions the problem is viewed in (both
2D and 3D; probably other D's, too, but I'm not gversed in them!  ;-)  )
Imagine a plane (everyone run back to your geometry books!), extending into
infinity in all directions:  one can imagine an infinity of lines
criss-crossing -- and even being parallel! -- the run throughout this
plane.  Do the lines exist tangibly?  No.  Does that mean that they don't
exist?  No! Thus,  I'm only saying that it is the _lines_ which are always
there; one cannot configure the paper without them; thus, one must look to
those lines to define the various kinds of folds!  Of course, this becomes
much, much more difficult in defining things like "petal fold" or "squash
fold," but those have other elements which can be incorporated into their
definitions for ease of use.

        As for the matter of the lines differing by infinitesimal whits,
that's pretty much a moot point in origami, because all of a sudden we're
launched into a discussion headed straight for the analyst's box of alef
infinity sets!  Definition-wise, I would say that, even if the angle
between the lines is 10^-10 or 10^-100000000, it's a crimp.  Mathematicians
don't, at some magical point, consider lines which really do intersect
_somewhere_ to be parallel -- although they are certainly "virtually"
parallel!  8-)  However, in origami, we don't need to deal with that; I
can't fathom a model in which crimps of such slight nature are required.
Even if they were, one could always say it was a "virtual" pleat!

>(Definitions aside, Jerry gave a very good description of performing the
>folds, whatever-they-are.)

        Gee...I'm blushing!  A comment like that from a folder of your
calibre is exhilarating!  Thanks!  8-)

Jerry D. Harris
Denver Museum of Natural History
2001 Colorado Blvd.
Denver, CO  80205
(303) 370-6403

Internet:  jdharris@teal.csn.net
CompuServe:  73132,3372

--)::)>   '''''''''''''/O\'''''''''''`  Jpq--   =o}\   w---^/^\^o

OOO f the Earth's many creatures, not all did survive.
O   O Only those that adapted are today still alive!
OOO Those that couldn't -- or wouldn't -- are with us no more:
The most famous of these is the great dinosaur!
"Evolution," they call it; a 10-dollar word.
That's how nature, in time, from a fish, made a bird.

                                                -- Martin J. Giff

--)::)>   '''''''''''''/O\'''''''''''`  Jpq--   =o}\   w---^/^\^o





Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 21:33:51 -0400
From: jdharris@teal.csn.net (Jerry D. Harris)
Subject: Re: Seeking Grand Piano Diagrams

>Hello all,
>This is my first contribution to this list (I've been listening for awhile).
>I've been folding on and off for almost twenty years, and I have a passion
>for realistic folds (which often turn out to be the most complex). I've
>amassed a large library of books (my favorites are by Lang, Montroll, and
>Engel), but I've never come across Patricia Neal's Grand Piano, which I've
>seen in pictures. Does anyone know if there is a book currently in
>publication in which it appears?
>Alternatively, if there is anyone out there who has the diagrams and would
>like to share them with me, I would happily cover the cost of postage. A FAX
>would also work.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>John Marcolina

John -

        I think you meant to say Patricia Crawford's "Baby Grand Piano"
model...but hey, _we_ knew what you meant!  8-)  The model was published in
a now-out-of-print book called _Origami 4_ by Robert Harbin.  5 pages of
diagrams, but I could easiy condense that into 1 or 2 and mail them off to
you -- just e me your address!

Jerry D. Harris
Denver Museum of Natural History
2001 Colorado Blvd.
Denver, CO  80205
(303) 370-6403

Internet:  jdharris@teal.csn.net
CompuServe:  73132,3372

--)::)>   '''''''''''''/O\'''''''''''`  Jpq--   =o}\   w---^/^\^o

OOO f the Earth's many creatures, not all did survive.
O   O Only those that adapted are today still alive!
OOO Those that couldn't -- or wouldn't -- are with us no more:
The most famous of these is the great dinosaur!
"Evolution," they call it; a 10-dollar word.
That's how nature, in time, from a fish, made a bird.

                                                -- Martin J. Giff

--)::)>   '''''''''''''/O\'''''''''''`  Jpq--   =o}\   w---^/^\^o





Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 22:54:43 -0400
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: R. Lang's - Crimps and pleats

Jerry, I don't know how it happened, but you seem to have a different
definition of pleats and crimps than what I (and Robert, and John
Montroll, and many other folders I know!) consider to be correct. It is
surprising to me considering the calibre of your models! Please don't
take the following as criticism of you or your origami; it's just my
attempt to clear things up. Try thinking about it this way:

A pleat can occur through one or more layers of paper. If you break it
down to its component steps, it consists of a mountain fold that is
adjacent to a valley fold. These folds can be at any angle relative to
each other.

A crimp, on the other hand, must occur where you have more than one layer
of paper. The simplest case is when you have two layers. These layers
must be joined to each other by a crease. The actual crimp, then,
consists of two adjacent reverse folds through the two layers of paper
along the crease line. One will be an inside reverse fold, and the other
will be an outside reverse fold.

Further confusion arises with the terms "inside crimp" and "outside
crimp". These definitions definitely depend upon the angle of the two
reverse folds involved in the crimp. I am constantly getting these two
reversed. The following definitions might be reversed. An inside crimp
occurs when the two reverse folds meet at the open edges of the crimp
(i.e. not along the crease edge that joins the two layers of paper that
you are crimping through). And outside crimp is just the opposite: the
two reverse folds meet at the crease edge that joins the two layers of
paper.

Notice that you can get crimps that are neither "inside" nor "outside"
such as when the two reverse folds are parallel to each other. You would
claim, assuming that I've understood your definitions, that this is a
form of a pleat. However, a pleat is not constructed from reverse folds,
but from adjacent mountain and valley folds. Therefore, you can construct
crimps with parallel reverse folds, and pleats with adjacent mountains
and valleys that are at an angle to each other and meet at the edge of
the paper.

To summarize, a pleat is a construction of adjacent mountain and valley
folds, and a crimp is a construction of adjacent inside and outside
reverse folds. If you want to generalized one in terms of the other, you
might say that a crimp consists of two mirror-image pleats that are
joined along one edge.

I hope this helps to clear things up!

Joseph Wu      <jwu@cs.ubc.ca> | Witty quote is now back to the
Master's Student               |   drawing board due to squeamish
University of British Columbia |   readers. Any suggestions?
WWW: http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/origami.html (Origami Page)





Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 22:57:39 -0400
From: MLGerard@aol.com
Subject: Help with Ghostscript

Sorry to repeat this message - it didn't get sent in it's entirety the first
time around.

I am finding it impossible to run the DOS or Windows version of Ghostscript
3.12 (or earlier versions for that matter) on my Pentium-90.  No matter what
I type after the GS> prompt I always get the message "error /undefined in gs"
followed by a whole lot of junk including messages like "Execution stack:  %
interp_exit", "Dictionary stack", "Current allocation mode is local" and
"Current file position is 3."

I have downloaded and installed all the necessary files according to the
documentation.  I know this is not the best place to ask a technical question
like this, but I haven't gotten any responses to my plight which I have
posted it in the comp.lang.postscript newsgroup.

I'm looking forward to the day when I can print and view all these wonderful
files found in the archives.

Can anybody help me?  Perhaps there's another ps emulator out there that
might work on my system?

Thanks to all.

Monica Gerard
Who wants to make the armadillo and dragon for my 2 year old.





Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 23:05:33 -0400
From: Steve Vinik <z007169b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>
Subject: Paper: the launching pad of the imagination

I'm a paper fan. I wouldn't be compleat without it. Here's a poem I wrote
upon a waterbomb when I was but a college lad:

PAPERSKIN            [can also be read as paper's kin!]

This poem
Can be crushed,
Deflated,
Unraveled and ripped.

It can also be . . .

I N F L A T E D
Flung into the sky
and enjoyed.

This is not a box.
This is a creation
Put together with
intelligence and care.

This is not a toy
but a wedding of
paper & fingers

E X P L O D E D
into consummation
with a kiss.

         --Steve Vinik, 1971

z007169b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us

"Have a frabjous day!" as Alice would say
through her looking glass.





Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 23:49:05 -0400
From: Meredith Trauner <trauner@husc.harvard.edu>
Subject: random computer-generated models (humor, sort of)

I thought this might be of interest.  It's another twist on computer-aided
origami design.  :-)  We wrote some LISP code for my computer science class
for generating random sentences, and I wrote a grammar for it to generate
origami instructions.  Here's a sample output:

(generate 'starter)
=>
START WITH A SQUARE , COLORED SIDE UP . NIL

(gen 25 'sentence)
=>
LIGHTLY CRIMP THE CORNER WITH THE HEAD .
FIRMLY INSIDE REVERSE FOLD THE HIDDEN PAPER ON TOP OF THE FLAP .
SINK THE MODEL ON TOP OF THE PAPER .
THIS IS A TRICKY STEP :
CRIMP SOME OF THE LARGE HEAD .
LIGHTLY CREASE SOME OF THE HEAD .
SINK THE TINY PAPER TO TOUCH THE TRIANGLE .
VALLEY FOLD SOME OF THE EDGE .
RABBIT-EAR THE LARGE MODEL .
HIDE THE LARGE FLAP TO TOUCH THE SHADED PAPER .
FOLD SOME OF THE TAIL .
RABBIT-EAR THE SMALL MODEL .
VALLEY FOLD THE HIDDEN TRIANGLE .
CREASE THE PAPER .
LIGHTLY OUTSIDE REVERSE FOLD THE SHADED PAPER INSIDE THE EDGE .
THIS IS A TRICKY STEP :
SINK THE TAIL ON THE FLAP .
CRIMP THE SHADED PAPER .
THIS IS A TRICKY STEP :
FOLD THE SHADED EDGE TO TOUCH THE EDGE .
MOUNTAIN FOLD SOME OF THE PAPER TO TOUCH THE LEG .
FOLD THE FLAP ON THE TAIL .
TURN OVER SOME OF THE MODEL AS FAR AS IT WILL GO .
INSIDE REVERSE FOLD THE MODEL ON TOP OF THE HEAD .
HIDE SOME OF THE HIDDEN LEG .
NIL

 (generate 'end)
=>
THE ELEPHANT IS COMPLETE ! NIL

It's not quite Tree-Maker, but hey.   :-)

Meredith Hilary Trauner





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 00:52:19 -0400
From: jdharris@teal.csn.net (Jerry D. Harris)
Subject: Re: R. Lang's - Crimps and pleats

Joe -

        Thanks for the kind words about my models!  Actually, I've been so
low-key in the world of origami in the last few years, that while I have
invented a few models, I haven't been diagramming them at all -- no time!
I'm not even an OUSA member anymore, and I have long since dropped the BOS
service.

        I understand what you and Robert Lang have said about crimps and
pleats, and please believe that I in no way have taken these words as
criticism; only as teachings!  8-)  Since I appear to be in a drastic
minority (of about one, as far as I can tell...) on this matter, I suppose
that, for ease of understanding and model sharing between myself and
everyone else, I will refrain from the usage of "crimp" and "pleat" I have
been using.  This isn't a big deal to me; I've been folding long enough
that if I run across the terms in a model's diagrams, I can avoid confusion
by examining the diagrams and logically working out what is being done.  I
hereby retract my statement about correcting the diagram in Robert Lang's
"Nautilus" model.

Jerry D. Harris
Denver Museum of Natural History
2001 Colorado Blvd.
Denver, CO  80205
(303) 370-6403

Internet:  jdharris@teal.csn.net
CompuServe:  73132,3372

--)::)>   '''''''''''''/O\'''''''''''`  Jpq--   =o}\   w---^/^\^o

OOO f the Earth's many creatures, not all did survive.
O   O Only those that adapted are today still alive!
OOO Those that couldn't -- or wouldn't -- are with us no more:
The most famous of these is the great dinosaur!
"Evolution," they call it; a 10-dollar word.
That's how nature, in time, from a fish, made a bird.

                                                -- Martin J. Giff

--)::)>   '''''''''''''/O\'''''''''''`  Jpq--   =o}\   w---^/^\^o





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 04:12:52 -0400
From: "M.J.van.Gelder" <M.J.van.Gelder@rc.rug.nl>
Subject: Re: Best of Origami-L -- Great idea!.

m>As I was writing the mail asking about availability of info on the archive,
m>i thought "naturally it is archived, but as you mentioned it's buried into
m>obscurity".
m>
m>It would be infinitely more useful if there were categories:
m>ie: model instructions
m>    general instructions
m>    resources

If you want to retrieve messages in a specific object from the archives you
may send a message to (MIND: this is NOT the address in the From of this
message! It is located on the archive computer):

   maarten@info.service.rug.nl

with in the body one or more lines (omit the text behind the !):

   messages  keyword    ! asks for all messages with keyword in the subject
   messages key1 key2   ! all messages with both keys together present
   help                 ! gives help on this mail service
   stop                 ! prevents error messages, otherwise your signature
                        ! is interpreted as retrieve command

So MIND if you put a wrong subject in your message, nobody can retrieve it
from the archives with this mail service.

So if you send a message with in the body

   messages best origami

you'll receive at least this message.

Maarten van Gelder, Rekencentrum RuG, RijksUniversiteit Groningen, Holland





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 08:57:47 -0400
From: Yusri Johan <gs01yyj@panther.Gsu.EDU>
Subject: Mr. Robert Lang's Insect Origami Book

Hi All,
        What I am about to write here is probably a good news for those
who have been waiting for Mr. Lang's Insect Origami Book (especially me
8:-)). I have just recently telnet to _Data Research Associates Inc._ to do
some book searching. When I type in Mr. Lang's name, there I saw the
Insect Origami book. Without any further dues, here is the book title and
I.S.B.N :
         Origami Insects and Their Kin: Step-by-step Instructions in over
         1500 Diagrams.
         I.S.B.N. : 0-486-28602-9
         Published by Dover.

Whether this has hit the stand or not, I am not sure.  I am going to look
for it at my local bookstores.

Later.
Yusri "Info man" Johan





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 09:30:35 -0400
From: Mark Morden <marmonk@eskimo.com>
Subject: How do _you_ memorize folds?

It's been a while since this subject has been discussed here, but it has
been on my mind recently:  memorizing folds.  I find it frustrating when,
out in the world and away from my books, someone says "fold something,"
and I draw a blank.  I think of all the cool models I know how to do but
can only _remember_ something simple like a crane.  Has anybody got a
system or tricks they use to memorize folding sequences, or is it just by
rote.

>From experience and some reading on the matter, memory aids rely on
associative imagining.  You can remember something if you imagine the item
with something that looks or sounds similar.  For example, I met a client
the other day whose name was Henry Aronson.   Being a baseball fan, I
imagined Hank Aaron standing next to this guy with his arm around him.
When I tried to remember the clients name, I would see the image of Hank
Aaron and Henry Aronson would pop in my head.

The problem I have with origami folds is being able to associate a fold
with some other image.  With what would you associate "Fold upper left
corner to center of paper," for instance?  Anybody have any thoughts on
the subject?

Thanks
Mark Morden
marmonk@eskimo.com





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 10:36:54 -0400
From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org>
Subject: Re: How do _you_ memorize folds?

> It's been a while since this subject has been discussed here, but it has
> been on my mind recently:  memorizing folds.  I find it frustrating when,
> out in the world and away from my books, someone says "fold something,"
> and I draw a blank.  I think of all the cool models I know how to do but
> can only _remember_ something simple like a crane.  Has anybody got a
> system or tricks they use to memorize folding sequences, or is it just by
> rote.
>

I don't know if I will be using the proper origami terms. I am familiar
with Harry Lorraines (sp?) memory system but have never used it to memorize
folds. Like you I generally do draw a blank but I have now found that if I
make a conscious effort to memorize a model, then all I have to do is fold
it a few times and I will remember it. Weeks later, though, I will have to
refresh my memory if I would want to teach that particular model. I don't
consider myself a professional folder. Odds are that the professionals out
there simply have learned by looking at a model to figure out what folds
are logically necessary to obtain the completed project. Perhaps it simply
boils down to practice, and more practice?

----
ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org
sheldon.ackerman@nycps.nycenet.edu





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 12:06:29 -0400
From: lisaa@gsa-orsp.crown.nwu.edu (Lisa Abel)
Subject: Re: How do _you_ memorize folds?

>It's been a while since this subject has been discussed here, but it has
>been on my mind recently:  memorizing folds.  I find it frustrating when,
>out in the world and away from my books, someone says "fold something,"
>and I draw a blank.  I think of all the cool models I know how to do but
>can only _remember_ something simple like a crane.  Has anybody got a
>system or tricks they use to memorize folding sequences, or is it just by
>rote.
>
You could take time to make photocopies of a few designs you like--that are
relatively few in folds--reduced so that they fit on a piece of thin paper
(like onion skin paper) that will *fold* up and fit comfortably in your
billfold/wallet, or in an envelope in your briefcase/backpack? In other
words, use folded paper resources rather than memory.

Lisa





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 12:31:24 -0400
From: lisaa@gsa-orsp.crown.nwu.edu (Lisa Abel)
Subject: Re: Paper: the launching pad of the imagination

On February 24, Steve Vinik submitted a poem he
> wrote upon a waterbomb

>         --Steve Vinik, 1971

>z007169b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
>
>"Have a frabjous day!" as Alice would say
>through her looking glass.

"Oh frabjous day, Calloo! Callay! we chortle in our joy" as did the beaming
boy in the Jabberwocky! I, too, enjoy the poetry of paper. Has anyone else
combined that quintessential Japanese poetic form--the haiku--with origami?
It makes a wonderful match: the seeming simplicity of each art form belying
their complexity.  I've combined the two in mobiles and gifts: simply write
the haiku (the translation together with the Japanese calligraphy, if
possible) on a piece of paper that compliments your origami creation.
Libraries usually have a number of haiku collections from the Japanese
masters.

EXAMPLE:
Origami: a swallow hangin down from inside a tri-corner hat (meant to
resemble a roof peak and rafters).

Haiku, written on the tri-corner hat after it was folded:

                Rows of warehouses
                        Behind them is a road where
                                        swallows come and go

(This is a translation of a haiku by one of the Japanese masters, though I
can't remember his name right off.)

Lisa





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 12:41:43 -0400
From: Stamm@aol.com
Subject: Re: How do _you_ memorize folds?

> Has anybody got a system or tricks they use to memorize folding
> sequences, or is it just by rote.

Interesting question:  I think in my own mind I remember things by "forms"
First and most obvious I remember the BASE (and that is usually a quarter
or a third of the solution.  then I apply "variations" on top of the forms.
This may not be really clear after a point though I don't think about
remembering a fold -- My fingers just do it.

Someone once told me if you want to make something a "habit" do it 28
times... I don't know-- I usually remember a model after 4 or 5 times
folding it.

My 2 cents,
Tom Stamm





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 13:04:00 -0400
From: brannon@ranger.enet.dec.com
Subject: Re: How do _you_ memorize folds?

I memorize folds by folding about 10 of a new model I'm trying to learn,
the first couple of times by following the diagrams, and the rest with
the book closed.  I then try to fold the smallest possible size of that
model to carry around in my shirt pocket, so I can refresh my memory if needed.

But about a month later I find I've forgotten how to start folding that model.
Once I get past the first few folds the rest comes back to me.

After I fold 50 of the model the memory seems to stay around.
(the downside is finding homes for all those dragons, dinosaurs, birds, cats,
 bats, boxes, etc.  I give them away at work by using the top of my
 bookcase to display them.)

Try mentally associating the models with the base they start from.
Start with a bird base, and just practice folding about six different
models that use that as a starting point.

dennis





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 13:12:28 -0400
From: Laurie_Reynolds@smec.sel.sony.com (Laurie Reynolds)
Subject: Re: How do _you_ memorize folds?

----- Begin Included Message -----

> Has anybody got a system or tricks they use to memorize folding
> sequences, or is it just by rote.

----- End Included Message -----

I once folded 50 lily's for my girlfriend's baby shower, at the baby shower,
I tried to show someone how to do it, but completely forgot.  Later, I went
     home,
relearned the model, and made a point of teaching it to people, three
different times.  I think this is how I am able to remember models, by teaching
it to someone else.

Good luck :-)





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 14:15:47 -0400
From: jdharris@teal.csn.NET (Jerry D. Harris)
Subject: Re: Mr. Robert Lang's Insect Origami Book

>Hi All,
>        What I am about to write here is probably a good news for those
>who have been waiting for Mr. Lang's Insect Origami Book (especially me
>8:-)). I have just recently telnet to _Data Research Associates Inc._ to do
>some book searching. When I type in Mr. Lang's name, there I saw the
>Insect Origami book. Without any further dues, here is the book title and
>I.S.B.N :
>         Origami Insects and Their Kin: Step-by-step Instructions in over
>         1500 Diagrams.
>         I.S.B.N. : 0-486-28602-9
>         Published by Dover.
>
>Whether this has hit the stand or not, I am not sure.  I am going to look
>for it at my local bookstores.
>
>Later.
>Yusri "Info man" Johan

Yusri -

        I saw the ref to this book in the Library of Congress telnet
location -- as well as two new Montroll books, _North American Animals in
Origami_ and _Birds in Origami_ -- and immediately called my local
bookstore for info (The Tattered Cover is one of, if not _the_ largest
bookstore west of the Mississippi).  Their searches informed me that the
two Montroll books are currently shipping, but the Lang book won't be
released until something like July.  Of course, all these dates are subject
to change at the whim of the publisher...!

Jerry D. Harris
Denver Museum of Natural History
2001 Colorado Blvd.
Denver, CO  80205
(303) 370-6403

Internet:  jdharris@teal.csn.net
CompuServe:  73132,3372

--)::)>   '''''''''''''/O\'''''''''''`  Jpq--   =o}\   w---^/^\^o

OOO f the Earth's many creatures, not all did survive.
O   O Only those that adapted are today still alive!
OOO Those that couldn't -- or wouldn't -- are with us no more:
The most famous of these is the great dinosaur!
"Evolution," they call it; a 10-dollar word.
That's how nature, in time, from a fish, made a bird.

                                                -- Martin J. Giff

--)::)>   '''''''''''''/O\'''''''''''`  Jpq--   =o}\   w---^/^\^o





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 15:21:01 -0400
From: pdc@lunch.engr.sgi.com (Paul Close)
Subject: Lang's Insects and Montroll's Lobster

>       What I am about to write here is probably a good news for those
> who have been waiting for Mr. Lang's Insect Origami Book (especially me
> 8:-)). I have just recently telnet to _Data Research Associates Inc._ to do
> some book searching. When I type in Mr. Lang's name, there I saw the
> Insect Origami book. Without any further dues, here is the book title and
> I.S.B.N :
>          Origami Insects and Their Kin: Step-by-step Instructions in over
>          1500 Diagrams.
>          I.S.B.N. : 0-486-28602-9
>          Published by Dover.
>
> Whether this has hit the stand or not, I am not sure.  I am going to look
> for it at my local bookstores.

This isn't a flame against R Lang, but I sure hope it's not as twisted as
his housefly in Origami Zoo!  That one gave me fits!  There's one step in
the middle where you unfold the entire model, and refold a rather complex
shape in one step!  It took me about an hour!  It's also the first and only
model I've done that uses "wraps"!  Well, that's enough exclamations for now.
Is this book like that?  :-)

Last night I folded Montroll's American Lobster (Animal Origami for the
Maso....er..Enthusiast) out of a 16" square of red and green xmas wrapping
paper.  Somehow I ended up with the head, claws and antennae all red, just
the way I wanted.  This is a fun model to fold, the instructions are
extremely clear, and it's mostly squashes and reverse folds, so it's not
incredibly difficult (like, for example, the inside sink in Montroll's
insect base!).  The results are most impressive, although the tail is
rather wimpy.  I would advise using large, thin paper, as one of the final
steps has you rabbit folding an estimated 20 layers of paper!  Impossible,
I know....  Fortunately, you can just sort of roll them, then separate and
refine the folds, which turn into three legs.

Another model that's impressed me is the turtle in the same book.  The
book's illustration didn't give me any indication it was going to be a
wonderfully rounded "3d" model!  Boy was I surprised!  The shell is very
solid and thick, just like a turtle's shell.  I later folded one out of
green foil, which now has a place in the "monitor of origami", with a gold
foil dromedary and a purple foil (Montroll insect of some sort).
--
Paul Close          pdc@sgi.com          http://reality.sgi.com/employees/pdc/

                     No fate but what we make





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 18:58:14 -0400
From: Tamar Schiller <aimee@free.org>
Subject: Re: How do _you_ memorize folds?

On Fri, 24 Feb 1995, Mark Morden wrote:

> It's been a while since this subject has been discussed here, but it has
> been on my mind recently:  memorizing folds.  I find it frustrating when,
> out in the world and away from my books, someone says "fold something,"
> and I draw a blank.  I think of all the cool models I know how to do but
> can only _remember_ something simple like a crane.  Has anybody got a
> system or tricks they use to memorize folding sequences, or is it just by
> rote.

I have the same problem! In my room, I have about 50 really neat origami
pieces that I have made from various books I checked out of my library.
But, whenever I want to fold that thing again, I have to get the book out
again, 'cause I just can't remember how I did it!
But, the worst is when I'm either half-way through it and forget the
rest, or half-way through it and make a different fold from the one I
meant and wind up making a totally different thing!
Ah well, maybe I'll just have it tattooed to my hand or something (just
kidding)

:)

-aimee (the internet teen)

aimee@free.org





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 20:17:22 -0400
From: Dan Gries <dangries@math.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: wrapping presents

i love wrapping presents - yesterday i wrapped a CD for my girlfriend -
it looked really nice, perhaps you might want to try this - i made two
humongous Sonobe units out of tissue paper (the kind for wrapping), two
layers thick, put the CD inside and connected the two units in the
obvious way.  it looked so nice - of course the two units should be different
colors.  then to make a label/card, i folded a small piece of paper in
half and stuck it halfway into one of the units, so that it made a square
sticking out.  well - too hard to explain, maybe you understand.

that's all.

dan gries
dangries@math.ohio-state.edu





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 20:48:11 -0400
From: Bob Roos <roos@cs.smith.edu>
Subject: Re: Paper: the launching pad of the imagination

On Fri, 24 Feb 1995, Lisa Abel wrote:

> boy in the Jabberwocky! I, too, enjoy the poetry of paper. Has anyone else
> combined that quintessential Japanese poetic form--the haiku--with origami?

This reminded me of something I saw years ago, and I've just spent a half
hour searching fruitlessly for it. But I have a record of it in an old
issue of FOLD, circa 1987. Sorry for the lack of publisher information,
but I think it HIGHLY UNLIKELY you could find this book anywhere unless
you got lucky and found it (as I did) at a used book sale somewhere (it's a
slim paperback, as I recall). Heck, I can't even locate it in my own house.

   From _Typography/Basic Principles_, by John Lewis:

        Photo caption: "Typography at Play. Matsuo Basho's poem
        designed as a three-dimensional folded square by Edward
        Wright. The Chinese/Japanese characters and instruction
        sheet are by Matilda Cheung."

There is a haiku, together with two accounts of how it came to be written
and three photographs of a salt-cellar. Here is a small portion of the text:

        furu-ike ya: kawazu tobi-komu: mizu-no-oto
        old pond ya: a frog jumps in: water sound

        by matsuo basho 1644-94
        this haiku written 1686

               in his garden at edo (tokyo) with friends/pupils
               talk pause - plop heard          plop
        basho: kawazu-tobikomu mizu-no-oto
               frog-jump-in water sound       frog/plop
               they realize it is haiku ending
               discuss possible first line
        basho: furu-ike ya
               old pond ya            pond
               this poem founds modern haiku in touch with life
     the pond:  the unchanging (nonself as counterspace of mind :
               nonself as counterspace of world)
     the frog:  the momentary (mind & world)
     the plop:  the splash of intersection

Printed on the four corners of the closed salt cellar, in clockwise order,
are the letters f, r, g, o. Flex the salt cellar open in one direction,
and the letters (again in clockwise order) p, o, d, n appear inside. Flex it
the other way, and the letters p, l, p, o appear inside.

Bob Roos
roos@cs.smith.edu





Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 21:36:25 -0400
From: Kelly Reed <kreed@lcsc.edu>
Subject: Re: How do _you_ memorize folds?

        I agree that teaching a fold to others helps you to remember it.
I have told some stories while folding and I find that really helps me
remember the folds.  Stories are easy for me to remember and the folds
just become linked with the words.

        Some people (Gay Gross and Rachel Katz) make up stories specifically to
     make teaching/remembering folds
easier.  In this case each part of the story describes the fold (ex. they
went to the center for a cupboard fold.)

        Another good method is to associate the shape of the paper at
each step rather than the fold itself with something.  So going from a
preliminary base to bird base might be something like square--kite--open
doors--canoe.  I suspect all of these ideas work better with simple folds
which are not that hard to remember anyway, but I thought I would add
what I have used anyway.

                              Kelly Reed
                              Lewiston, Idaho





Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 07:12:42 -0400
From: Steve Vinik <z007169b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>
Subject: Happy Hatsume!

This is Steve again from sunny south Florida. I live in Pompano Beach and
within half an hour drive is the Morikami Museum. There is a park
surrounding the museum and the entire place is dedicated to Japanese
culture.

It is ironic that most of my visitors love to visit the park but they
come at Christmas time or the thick of summer when there's not much
happening at the Morikami. This weekend, however, is the celebrati on of
the Hatsume Fair and I don't have anyone to accompany me--unless I can
talk my youngest daughter into it. My wife will have nothing of those crowds!

At the Hatsume Fair, so the newspaper informs me, there will be Japanese
drama, flowers, sword and martial arts demonstrations, and paper crane
folding. All to celebrate the coming of spring

If I do go, I'll give you all a report! Happy Hatsume to every one!

Steve Vinik
z007169b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us

"Have a frabjous day!" as Alice would say
through her looking glass.





Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 11:42:54 -0400
From: Yusri Johan <gs01yyj@panther.Gsu.EDU>
Subject: ISBN for Montroll's Book (was Re: Mr. Robert Lang's...)

Here is the ISBN for John Montroll's book:

Birds in Origami ISBN: 0-486-28341-0
this book is 1994 publication.

North American Animals in Origami/ John Montroll, with the contribution
of Fumiaki Kawahata.
ISBN: 0-486-28667-3
Now, this one is 1995 publication.

Later.
Yusri





Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 12:20:38 -0400
From: tim kennedy <TKENNEDY@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
Subject: Re: Happy Hatsume!

Regarding the note concerning the fair's agenda of martial arts, I remenber
reading somewhere that origami was considered by the Samurai to be a martial
art as well as ikebana(sp?). Could anyone explain this concept to me? How is it
 that something as violent as judo or swordplay be compared to such a delicate
activity as paper folding or flower arranging? I imagine that it has something
to do with performing deliberate gestures but would like some clarification.
cheers,
tk





Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 13:57:51 -0400
From: ACPQUINN@middlebury.edu
Subject: Re: Happy Hatsume!

Sorry, I have nothing here to refer to previous messages :P... but in the
previous message the question was raised as to how the delicate arts of origami
and ikebana[sic] could be compared to judo and other martial arts. It's
actually very easy.
        To an outsider, i.e. your average American citizen, the "martial" arts
seem very violent.  How could fighting seem otherwise to an American?  However,
the Japanese, and especially the practitioners of these arts, the Samurai, see
it quite differently.  To them, the martial arts are a form of meditation, and
are never to be used with violent intent; only in self defense.  Someday, watch
a class in tai-chi (the passive variety; there are two varieties of tai-chi)
and you will see the connection between the slow, graceful movements that seem
almost like dancing and the folding of a paper crane.  To the Samurai, all
martial arts, no matter how "violent" they are to the outsider, are meditative
in philosophy; if you watch a professional, especially a Japanese professional
martial artist, the master will always meditate beforehand, presumably to
collect his/her strength, both physically and spiritually.  To the outsider it
may take more in-depth searching to find the beauty and spirit that is so
evident in origami, in an art form that incorporates screaming and violent
actions.  Keep looking, though, the similarities are there.
        Hope this little rambling message has helped... :)
Alasdair Post-Quinn
acpquinn@middlebury.edu
"icki-icki-icki-icki-fatang-zoooop-boing!"





Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 14:47:11 -0400
From: Rjlang@aol.com
Subject: Re: Jerry Harris is [Laurie's] hero!

Continuing the thread on pleats versus crimps... Jerry writes:

> Hmmmmm...I never thought about it that way; to me, the big
> difference between a pleat and a crimp has _always_ been whether
> or not the fold lines connect.

The problem I have with this distinction is that a "pleat" can turn into a
"crimp" by an infinitesimally small change in angle. This isn't just a
contrived example, either; the way I make a small-angle crimp is to make a
crimp with parallel edges (a pleat, by this definition) and stretch it to the
appropriate angle (turning it into a crimp).

> The word "pleat"...is defined, really, as a fold in
> cloth made by doubling material over on itself.  True, this
> definition technically doesn't say that all the fold lines are
> parallel...

And a good thing that, because I've seen a "pleated" skirt made from a curved
rectangle of cloth in which the pleats are larger at the bottom of the skirt
than at the waist: i.e., the folds are not parallel. So I'd say the
cloth-folding etymology supports the notion that pleats need not be parallel.

> However, the term "crimp" is from the German/Dutch tradition,
> and is defined as "to cause to become wavy, bent, or warped."  The terms
> warped, bent, and wavy do not, IMHO, call to mind nice, symmetrical,
> parallel lines...No, these terms describe angularity -- lines that
> intersect at some point.

The "wavyness" in the crimp is in the cross-section of the paper (or the
edge-on view of the edges). This occurs even in parallel-edged crimps.

Incidentally, if you've ever used a "crimping" tool (such as the
pliers-looking-thing that crimps a sleeve joining two electrical wires --
which is called a crimp lug), they usually create parallel mountain and
valley folds in the thing being crimped.

We should also recognize prior usage as carrying some weight: and Robert
Harbin, who along with Sam Randlett established much of the English-language
folding terminology, uses the word "crimp" to describe two parallel reverse
folds in Secrets of Origami (1963).

> So, if then we have a nice definition of crimp, we must now
> differentiate them from pleats.

And so we do. A pleat is two or more nearly parallel or parallel folds of
opposite polarity (i.e., mountain and valley or valley and mountain) through
one or more layers of paper in which all of the layers are folded together as
one. A crimp is two or more nearly parallel or parallel folds of opposite
polarity through two or more layers of paper in which corresponding folds on
different layers of paper have different polarity. According to this
definition, there is no way to turn a pleat into a crimp or vice versa
through an infinitesimal deformation. Furthermore, where there are two layers
in the flap, the word "crimp" or "pleat" provides the crucial distinction
between the two actions when there is no edge view shown in the diagrams.

> Under your definition of crimp, more than one layer of paper is
> always involved...it neglects the (admittedly rarely used) example as I
> described in my initial letter, where a single layer of paper is folded via
> two lines which intersect at the edge of the paper.   Is this, then, a
> pleat?

Yes. That's what step 17 of the Nautilus is.

> I can easily teach anyone to pleat a series of parallel lines, but
> virtually everyone I've ever taught has a really difficult time with crimps
> of any sort, whether they be with a single flap or several!

True enough, but I would not use ease of teaching as the distinguishing
characteristic for naming folds. I can usually teach someone how to make a
very shallow closed sink but nearly everyone has a really difficult time with
narrow closed sinks; I would not, however, try to give them two different
names.

> Essentially, I just advocate retaining the usage of such terms as
> "inside crimp" and "outside crimp," as opposed to dumping them into the
> wastebasket in favor of just "crimp,"

The terms "inside" and "outside" crimp as you use them are appropriate for
two-layered crimps. However, if you are crimping a flap with more than two
layers that go zig-zag, "inside" and "outside" become ambiguous. Here's an
example: take a square, divide one corner into thirds using a valley and a
mountain fold, forming a long, skinny flap. Now crimp the flap in one
direction or the other. From the perspective of layers 1 and 2, it's an
inside crimp, but from the perspective of layers 2 and 3, it's an outside
crimp!

> It was this realization that led
> me to ponder just what defines a crimp; the intersection of the fold lines
> is absolutely common to all crimps (regular, inside, and outside); pleats
> are different in that they do not share this feature

The reason to use two different names is, IMO, to distinguish between two
fundamentally different structures, especially if a simplified folding
diagram (i.e., one that doesn't or can't show all layers) would be ambiguous.
The definition that I, Stephen Weiss, John Montroll, Robert Harbin, and lots
of other people use fulfils that criteria. If we need to let the audience
know that the lines are parallel, we use the word "parallel," as in "crimp,
making the creases parallel." If two differently named folds can differ by an
undiscernable amount -- in your definition, a "crimp" and a "pleat" can be
almost indistinguishable -- then I don't think two different names are
justified.

> However, in origami, we don't need to deal with that; I
> can't fathom a model in which crimps of such slight nature are required.
> Even if they were, one could always say it was a "virtual" pleat!

Actually, it's pretty common in origami I've seen that one wishes to change
the angle of a long, skinny point by a small amount: which one does with a
crimp in which the fold lines are very close to parallel but not quite.

> However, the statement [by Lang]
>   "The essential difference between a crimp and a pleat lies not
>   [in] the angle of
>   the folds...but in the
>   configuration of the raw edges of the paper (or the edges that would be
>   exposed in a slice through the paper). In a pleat, all of the edges in
the
>   flap go the same direction; in a crimp, different layers go different
>   ways."
> is, IMHO, erroneous.  The configuration of the paper is a
> function of the angles of the fold lines, not vice versa!

The statement is not erroneous. It *is* possible to make two different
configurations (two different stacking orders of the layers) with exactly the
same fold angles. *That's* the difference between a crimp and a pleat. Take a
piece of paper; fold it in half; then make a zig-zag pleat. That's one
configuration. Now use the creases you just made to reverse-fold one side in
and out. That's a crimp (my definition) and the layers have a different
configuration (stacking order) even through the fold angles (but not
directions) are the same.

> Trying to discuss this fine philosophical point is difficult to
> illustrate, so let me try to find a simpler example.  Really, it's a matter
> of which came first:  the chicken or the egg......I'm talking about
> amongst the infinite number of lines that theoretically exist on any given
> plane) or the configuration of the paper?

Um, sure, whatever. I don't have a problem with infinitesimally small
differences between angles because *I'm* not trying to distinguish by angle.

Fun topic. Apologies to the uninterested for wasting your bandwidth.

Robert Lang





Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 14:50:26 -0400
From: Kelly Reed <kreed@lcsc.edu>
Subject: Re: wrapping presents

        If you really enjoy wrapping presents, you should look at Kunio
Ekiguchi's *Gift Wrapping : Creative Ideas From Japan*.  I ordered this from
OUSA just before Christmas and had a great time with it.  I think he has
some similar ideas to yours, but not that exact design.  I will remember
your idea for the next time I wrap something square.

                          Kelly Reed
                          Lewiston, Idaho





Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 15:18:02 -0400
From: Hannibal the Cannibal <gjdh@st-andrews.ac.uk>
Subject: Hello

Hello everybody. I'm new to this list, and subscribed because I felt I
had an interest in origami, I enjoy recreating the few models I know time
and again. I wasn't sure what to expect when i subscribed but have found
that some of you obviously take it far more seriously than i think i ever
could. What i really wanted was a way of learning a few new (and not
hard) models without studying books on the subject. I appreciate that
it's very hard to describe folds in an e-mail (without diagrams) and
tat's probably not what you use this list for,... but i thought I'd ask
anyway. if anyone could tell me/show me how to make either a frog or a
dinosaur I'd be pretty pleased.
I originally looked on WWW for some step by step instructions but
couldn't find any, (are they there?).

So far i can make:

A Yawning Gnome Face
A Swan
A Box
A clapper
Various hats
A boat (galley)
planes/darts
and a funny creature something like a t-rex but a bit bird like also.
I used to be able to make a waterbomb (which i know is the starting point
for many models), but have forgotten how.
(And of course I can make one of those funny colour-cooser things if
that's not and insult).

Thanks,
See ya,
G.





Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 18:03:14 -0400
From: pdc@lunch.engr.sgi.com (Paul Close)
Subject: Re: Happy Hatsume!

For more insight into Japanese culture and the arts of the Samurai, I would
refer one to the book Musashi.  It is a classic.  Sorry I don't have more
info, but even with that one word, it should be easy to find :-)
--
Paul Close          pdc@sgi.com          http://reality.sgi.com/employees/pdc/

                     No fate but what we make





Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1995 00:04:07 -0400
From: Gretchen Klotz <gren@lclark.edu>
Subject: Re: How do _you_ memorize folds?

Since boxes and other unit origami models are my main focus, the
repetition required for each model helps me quickly memorize the folds.
(And repetition is how I memorize other things, like songs, poems,
speeches, dances [modern mostly], etc.) Since unit origami doesn't use the
standard bases and symmetry, I suspect that the models being fairly
diverse and unique helps me to memorize them.  I do have problems with
units that start out similarly but are eventually reversed (such as Fuse's
octagonal box lids from the english book).

I just finished teaching a series of classes at a private school here in
Portland, and the last box we made as a group was Fuse's octagonal box.
The base of that box is quite a challenge, with many marking and
intermediate step folds.  The students started naming the folds
themselves, all within an ice cream theme: the snow cone fold, the waffle
cone, the ice cream cone, etc.  It was pretty funny, but I sure had some
strong sugar cravings when I was done!

- Gretchen





Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1995 13:22:03 -0400
From: Yusri Johan <gs01yyj@panther.Gsu.EDU>
Subject: Origami, Martial Arts, and Philosophy (was Re: Happy Hatsume)

You (tim kennedy) wrote:
>
>
> Regarding the note concerning the fair's agenda of martial arts, I remenber
> reading somewhere that origami was considered by the Samurai to be a martial
> art as well as ikebana(sp?). Could anyone explain this concept to me? How is
     it
> that something as violent as judo or swordplay be compared to such a delicate
> activity as paper folding or flower arranging? I imagine that it has something
> to do with performing deliberate gestures but would like some clarification.
>
>

        I've been studying about Eastern (Chinese and Japanese) culture
on and off for quite sometime.  From my observation, I found that in both
culture, there are always philosophical aspects behind their cultures. In
Eric Kenneway's "Complete Origami" page 162 (about square), Mr. Kenneway
writes, "In Taoist writings, the square has been described as the First
Form (something fundamental in nature - or for other reasons, as he later
explains) and also, a symbol of undifferentiated void form which the
duality of opposing forces (yin and yang) originated."  Further down the
book, on the Zen section (p.190) Mr. Kenneway writes, "... the oneness of
the square of paper (which has the capacity to become all creatures,
interdependent because the square always remains a square) symbolizes
their belief in the harmony of the universe and the presence of the
Buddha-nature in all things."  I also observed that many of Japanese
cultures contains Tao and Zen philosophy in them. The tea ceremony and
aikido are two of these examples. I do not have a lot of knowledge of
ikebana. From my readings about ikebana, I found that a different
geometric shape of the flowers represent different things. Even the
height of the flowers' stem represent different things.

        As Alasdair said that martial arts which to the Western eyes appeared
to be violence are actually a moving meditation (I hope I have
interpreted Alasdair's comments correctly). I agree with that notion.
Origami for me is also a form of meditation. If I am to explain all of
these things, it will take a book to just explain all of these things.

I hope my explanation can, at least, clarify your question.

--
------------------------------------+------------------------------------------
Yusri Johan                         | Some days we feel like strangers. When
Georgia State University            | our heart opens, we will realize that
gs01yyj@panther.gsu.edu             | we belong just here.
Psychology and Communication        | (Jack Kornfield)





Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1995 15:05:38 -0400
From: Rjlang@aol.com
Subject: Re: Mr. Robert Lang's Insect Origami Book

>From Jerry Harris...

> I saw the ref to this book in the Library of Congress telnet
> location -- as well as two new Montroll books, _North American Animals in
> Origami_ and _Birds in Origami_ -- and immediately called my local
> bookstore for info...[deleted stuff]...Their searches informed me that the
> two Montroll books are currently shipping, but the Lang book won't be
> released until something like July.  Of course, all these dates are subject
to change at the whim of the publisher...!

The Lang book should be ready by convention time (or I'm gonna be really
ticked). North American Animals is, according to John, imminently available.
Birds in Origami is not yet written. They'll all be sold through Dover, so
get your Dover catalogs now!

And now for a word from Paul Close...

> This isn't a flame against R Lang, but I sure hope it's not as twisted as
> his housefly in Origami Zoo!  That one gave me fits!  There's one step in
> the middle where you unfold the entire model, and refold a rather complex
> shape in one step!  It took me about an hour!  It's also the first and only
> model I've done that uses "wraps"!  Well, that's enough exclamations for
now.
> Is this book like that?  :-)

(Evil cackle of glee): Yes, Paul, Origami Insects is 100% complex models,
chock-full of closed sinks, edgeless wraps, and other brutally
finger-numbing, tendon-popping maneuvers. If you (or anyone else) would like
a preview, download the Praying Mantis from the archives -- it's in the book,
too! However, the diagrams in Insects should be better and clearer than the
ones in Origami Zoo, since I've had a lot more practice diagramming in the
intervening years.

The funny thing is, with the pace of modern folding technology, many of the
techniques in Origami Insects have already been superceded by more
sophisticated stuff. The members of the Origami Tanteidan have done some
absolutely phenomenal flying insects with color-changed wings in the past
year. I've also been working on such things, and imagine that there will be
an "Origami Insects II" someday.

Robert





Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1995 15:21:39 -0400
From: Origamiist@aol.com
Subject: Re: Lang's Insects and Montroll's Lobster

I too was rather frustrated with Lang's fly but persisted and can now do it
almost from memory. There is an interesting story behind my love of this
model. I work at an advertising agency and our creative director and boss has
an annoying habbit of buzzing around all the time and getting on everyones
nerves So we all started calling him "The Fly".  On my bulletin board in my
office I have one of those plywood fly models also one I made out of foam
core that is about a foot long. When I saw the origami fly model I couldn't
beleive my luck! I have 4 or 5 of them sitting on my computer monitor. The
best ones are folded from 9" square foil paper. Now everyone wants one! I
recently found one of the first ones I tried to make uder some books in the
closet. They even look realistic when they are sqashed flat!  ;-)
-Vern





Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1995 15:26:11 -0400
From: Origamiist@aol.com
Subject: Re: How do _you_ memorize folds?

I find the only way to memorize a particular model is to just do it over and
over again. Each time try to get as far as you can without looking at the
book. I learned a model in junior highschool this way and over the years
forgot how to do it. It took me a while but eventualy it came back to me.
(after many failed attempts).
-Vern





Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1995 17:23:15 -0400
From: "Penelope R. Chua" <chupenr@minerva.cis.yale.edu>
Subject: What do you do with your origami models?

The recent discussion of Robert Lang's housefly in "Origami Zoo" prompted
me to remember the first and only time I made it.  One of my friends is a
drosophila (fruitfly) geneticist and for her birthday we all got together
to make her a cake and to custom-decorate it.  The guys brought black
plastic flies to put on the cake, and I, being only slightly more
tasteful, folded Robert Lang's housefly out of a 9" square and plopped it
onto the icing. (I had an incredibly stressful time folding it and the
only thing that made me not crumple it up in frustration was the
approaching dateline for the birthday party.)  My friend loved her
fly cake and lovingly rescued the origami fly from the icing, and I
think still has it someplace.  It will be a while, though, before I
accumulate enough patience to attempt folding it again.  Gosh, I really
hate it when the paper starts to rip someplace in the last few steps when
you are starting to be fooled into believing that you
have almost made it to the completed model!  Despite all this, I am
eagerly awaiting Mr. Lang's new insect book.  I hope there are more flies
in there to fold for my friend!

So what's your most memorable use of an origami model?

--
Penelope Chua                 chupenr@minerva.cis.yale.edu
Department of Biology         (203) 432-5052
Yale University
219 Prospect Street
Box 6666
New Haven, CT 06511
