




Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 20:18:30 -0400 (AST)
From: Steven Casey <scasey@enternet.com.au>
Subject: Re: Step 84 - Origami Fantasy

>I've just tried the Allosaurus this morning from a 4" square which is a
little tricky, however here is the answer..
>

Excuse me for exaggerating is was in fact a 6" square. <g>

Steve Casey
scasey@enternet.com.au
Melbourne Australia





Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 20:32:49 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <origami@planet.datt.co.jp>
Subject: [N really O] Re: The Forms of Origami    Part 2  [Long]

On Wed, 18 Dec 1996 DLister891@aol.com wrote:

=John's device is a sort of compass rose design, which generates a
=characteristic shape or "profile", which can be used  for a variety of
=purposes. It may indicate the paperfolding preferences of an individual
=folder. Or it can give a profile of the make-up of a particular kind of paper
=craft.

Hmm...another interesting cultural point. Such diagrams are extremely popular
here in Japan for expressing multidimensional quantities. For example, some TV
game shows will use these to show the degree of difficulty of a particular
contest (difficulty in terms of knowledge, intelligence, physical prowess,
etc). I've also seen these in computer magazines for rating the "goodness" of
a certain product (cost, power, usefulness to a task, etc.). In North America,
such functions are usually plotted on a table or graph of some sort.

          Joseph Wu           Faith: When you have come to the end of all the
  origami@planet.datt.co.jp   light that you know and need to step into the
 Webmaster, the Origami Page  darkness of the unknown, Faith is knowing that
http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami one of two things will happen: either there will
 Webmaster, DATT Japan Inc.   be something solid to stand on or you will be
    http://www.datt.co.jp     taught how to fly.                --Anonymous





Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 22:26:04 -0400 (AST)
From: Pat Slider <slider@stonecutter.com>
Subject: Re: Step 84 - Origami Fantasy

At 08:18 PM 12/18/96 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>I've just tried the Allosaurus this morning from a 4" square which is a
>little tricky, however here is the answer..
>>
>
>Excuse me for exaggerating is was in fact a 6" square. <g>

Whew! Glad to hear it wasn't 4". That was making me feel bad :->. Now please
don't tell me that this model should only take about 10 minutes to
finish....wetfolding, no less. (I think I spent somewhere between 5 to 6
hours getting to that step 84 :-<. Even given the high level of
interruptions....)

Thanks for the tips. I'll have to try it again before the end of the year.

pat slider
slider@stonecutter.com





Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 03:13:55 -0400 (AST)
From: GURKEWITZ@WCSUB.CTSTATEU.EDU
Subject: origami math sighting

Just got a copy of a review of "3D Geometric Origami: Modular Polyhedra"
by Gurkewitz and Arnstein, from *Mathematical Reviews*. The review is
mostly descriptive with a positive twist.

If anyone knows how things are chosen for these reviews, I'd like to hear
from you.

Rona





Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 03:21:44 -0400 (AST)
From: Matthew Birchard <psu05992@odin.cc.pdx.edu>
Subject: Sighting-Money Folds

        I thought I'd put in my personal pitch for promoting money folding
by letting the list know about a recent sighting of folded money on
National T.V. (in the U.S.A.).
        On Wednesday, December 18th, the Rosie O'Donnell Show had a
Christmas wreath which appeared to be made entirely of folded and or
rolled/wrapped money.  Granted, not all of the money was folded, BUT, if
I'm not mistaken a Rosette, very similar to Paul Jackson's was attached to
the wreath.  Anyone else see it?  The wreath was made by some college
students, for charity.  It supposedly had a $100.00 face value.
        Happy folding, and happy holidays,

Matt Birchard
<psu05992@odin.cc.pdx.edu>
Portland, OR, U.S.A.





Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 11:12:13 -0400 (AST)
From: "NIGEL POTTLE, TEACHER LIBRARIAN, JAMES FOWLER SENIOR HIGH"@Owl.nstn.ca
Subject: Joseph Wu's When Pigs grow wings...

Now that I have a graphic browser I am finally able to look at and drool over
the wonderful diagrams on everyone's home pages. I do remember seeing a message
from Joseph Wu that his "pigs..." diagram was available somewhere on the web.
Having looked at the photo I am eager to try it out. Can you point me in the
right direction?

Nigel Pottle
npottle@cbe.ab.ca





Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 11:31:06 -0400 (AST)
From: Theresa Davis <davis@msmc.edu>
Subject: Re: Joseph Wu's When Pigs grow wings...

 Theresa Davis                Email:     davis@msmc.edu

        I believe I got those diagrams from Mark's Origami Olio. You can
link there from Joseph Wu's Page.

        Does any one know the ISBN for Origami Fantasy.  I looked in the
archives, but the it was not listed.  Thank you in advance.





Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 12:01:49 -0400 (AST)
From: Pat Slider <slider@stonecutter.com>
Subject: Re: Joseph Wu's When Pigs grow wings...

At 11:31 AM 12/19/96 -0400, you wrote:
> Theresa Davis                     Email:    davis@msmc.edu
>
>       I believe I got those diagrams from Mark's Origami Olio. You can
>link there from Joseph Wu's Page.
>
>       Does any one know the ISBN for Origami Fantasy.  I looked in the
>archives, but the it was not listed.  Thank you in advance.

Wish I could help you here, but I couldn't find one printed (in Roman
numerals at least) on the book itself. Sometimes Sasuga lists the ISBN in
their online catalog though. Check there? I know they are still carrying
this title.

pat slider
slider@stonecutter.com





Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 12:29:47 -0400 (AST)
From: Sy Chen <sychen@leatherback.nist.gov>
Subject: Re: Joseph Wu's When Pigs grow wings...

At 11:31 AM 12/19/96 -0400, Theresa Davis wrote:

>       Does any one know the ISBN for Origami Fantasy.  I looked in the
>archives, but the it was not listed.  Thank you in advance.
>
>

There is no ISBN for Origami Fantasy. You may contact Sasuga
(http://www.terra.net/sasuga/origami.html) for ordering.
I got mine for $47.40(including shipping/handling).

Sy Chen





Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 12:34:54 -0400 (AST)
From: Pat Slider <slider@stonecutter.com>
Subject: A new source for Japanese titles.

Well, Knuffke and I have been corresponding with a bookseller in the bay
area who seems somewhat knowledgeable about the Japanese book publishing
business. He's put together an initial catalog, and since he has done so
much work in putting this together, I feel like it is only fair to pass this
on to a larger market.

Have to say that I myself have yet to order anything through Ege (I'm broke
till January), so I can't say much on how well the process works, but so far
I'm impressed with his responsiveness. If you are interested in seeing some
other Japanese titles on here that aren't currently listed, i.e. Momotani
titles, I think all you need do is ask.

Book #11, by the way, is the Kasahara title known as "Origami:El Mundo
Nuevo". If you are interested in one of these, Ege will be ordering it from
Japan....so it is not possible to get a title by Christmas. Plan on six weeks.

pat slider
slider@stonecutter.com

>I've put together an "official" Origami catalog. More may be added as I
>find them.
>
>                        ORIGAMI CATALOG #1
>                           Dec 14, 1996
>
>1.  Oshare na origami   by Kunihiro Kasahara
>        Published by Sanrio 1977                     $15.00
>
>2.  Origami  1 ~ 5      edited by Kunihiko Kasahara
>        Published by Yuki Shobo 1969                $15.00 each
>
>3.  Saishin, tanoshii origami no subete     by Kunihiko Kasahara
>        Published by Nihon Bungeisha  1991          $30.00
>        ISBN 4-537-01534-9
>
>4.  Tanoshii origami no hon     by Kunihiko Kasahara
>        Published by Kubo Shoten  1974               $26.00
>        4-7659-0007-X
>
>5.  Sosaku origami      by Akira Yoshizawa
>        Published by NHK Shuppan 1984               $70.00
>
>6.  Tanoshii origami    by Akira Yoshizawa
>        Published by Kamakura Shobo 1978            $24.00
>
>7.  Yasashii origami    by Akira Yoshizawa
>        Published by Kamakura Shobo 1978            $24.00
>
>8.  Ugoku origami       by Tomoko Fuse
>        Published by Seibundo Shinkosha 1992        $35.00
>        4-416-39210-9
>
>9.  Sekai no yunitto origami    by Tomoko Fuse
>        Published by Seibundo Shinkosha 1988        $35.00
>        4-416-38826-8
>
>10.  Rittai baraeti yunitto origami     by Tomoko Fuse
>        Published by Seibundo Shinkosha 1990        $35.00
>       ISBN 4-416-39012-2
>
>11.  Origami shin sekai      by Kunihiko Kasahara
>    published by Sanrio in 1989                          $84.00
>    ISBN  4-387-89254-4
>
>12.  Origami, sekai no tori   by Kunihiko Kasahara
>    published by Yuuki Shobo in 1970                     $14.50
>
>13.  Origami 1 : Senno Toshio sakuhinshu,
>    tanoshii dobutsutachi edited by Kunihiko
>    Kasahara ; published by Kubo Shoten in 1978     $27.00
>
>14.  Origami 2 : ugoku origami sakuhinshu
>    by Seiryo Takekawa, edited by Kunihiko Kasahara
>    published by Kubo Shoten in 1978                 $27.00
>
>15.  Origami 3 : atarashii sakuhin by Kunihiko Kasahara
>    Kubo Shoten in 1978                               $27.00
>
>16.  Origami ippai no hon    by Kunihiko Kasahara
>    Kubo Shoten in 1977                               $40.00
>
>17.  Origami nyumon      by Kunihiko Kasahara
>    published by Shogakukan in 1982                  $24.00
>
>18.  Origami hyakka  1 ~ 6 by Kunihiko Kasahara
>    published by Sanrio in 1990                       $25.00 each
>
>19.  Saishin kawaii origami no subete
>    by Kunihiko Kasahara
>    published by Nihon Bungeisha in 1991            $30.00
>
>20. Tsukatte asobou yunitto origami by Tomoko Fuse
>    published by Seibundo Shinkosha in 1987         $35.00
>
>21. Hako o tsukurou yunitto origami     by Tomoko Fuse
>    published by Seibundo Shinkosha in 1987         $35.00
>
>
>%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
>TERMS: Payment may be made by check or money order payable to T.C. Ege.
>We regret that we do not yet accept credit cards (an option we hope to
>have available soon). Shipping and insurance will be charged at cost
>according to method of shipment.
>     All books are sent to established customers on approval but presumed
>sold if not returned within ten days of receipt.  Customers with whom
>we have not done business are requested to either prepay their first
>order or supply appropriate trade references, after which an "on approval"
>relationship may be established (prepaid orders are returnable for any
>reason within ten days of receipt).  Libraries will be billed to
>accomodate their budgetary requirements.  All items remain the property
>of BOOKFINDER until payment is made in full.
>
>             [Reciprocal consideration is available to the trade.]
>
>
>                    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
>                MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO T.C.EGE
>                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>         =============================================
>         ||               BOOKFINDER                ||
>         ||              Thornton Ege               ||
>         ||   PO Box 847, Menlo Park CA 94026-0847  ||
>         ||   415-327-4574          tcege@cris.com  ||





Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 21:17:55 -0400 (AST)
From: Josh Draper <drape@dform.com>
Subject: VRML 2.0 origami

Hello,

My name's Josh Draper. I'm a 3d modeler in San Francisco doing VRML design.
I work for dFORM which does VRML design for Science and Education. I'm
currently writing a proposal to do a VRML 2.O origami project. It will
include animated tutorials in VRML 2.0 of the folding of several origami
models. In addition, I'm looking into the culture and history of origami to
make that a strong part of the project. Finally, I plan to have the site
translated into Japanese to make it available to a wide array of origami
practitioners.
        Any information on books or publications that would help my research is
greatly appreciated. Origami resources on the web are also highly useful.
Any suggestions about what would be interesting to include in this project
(especially the stories of people in origami) are welcome.

-Josh

---------------------
Josh Draper
Modeler
drape@dform.com
dFORM Inc.
http://www.dform.com/
415-357-1555





Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 00:25:26 -0400 (AST)
From: Michael & Janet Hamilton <mikeinnj@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: VRML 2.0 origami

Josh Draper wrote:
>         Any information on books or publications that would help my research
     is
> greatly appreciated. Origami resources on the web are also highly useful.
> Any suggestions about what would be interesting to include in this project
> (especially the stories of people in origami) are welcome.

The following sites have some info on origami history:

        http://cyber10.csz.com/paper/history.html
        http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~wdawes/History.html
        http://www.jumpmedia.com/peace/intro.html
        http://vislab-www.nps.navy.mil/~ejcranks/origami.html

A good page to start with that links to many other pages is:

        http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami

And to find stories about origami people, go to:

        http://www.mrc-cpe.cam.ac.uk/cpe/jong/agb/origami.html

and use the search engine for the origami archives.  David Lister posts many
     fascinating accounts of origami
history and personalities.

Janet Hamilton

--
mailto:Mikeinnj@concentric.net
http://www.concentric.net/~Mikeinnj/





Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 02:08:36 -0400 (AST)
From: Vincent & Veronique <osele@worldnet.fr>
Subject: Fr: Styles de pliages

Salut,

Pour le moment la discussion sur ce qui les styles de pliages a une
orientation plutot technique: peut-on couper ou non, format de depart
du papier...

Mais il y a des styles de pliage meme en restant dans l'origami
strict et pur (feuille carre non decoupe par ex).

Je pense entre autre a des cas extremes de Paul Jackson:
- le pliage a un seul pli (one fold)
- le pliage a une infinite de plis
- le minimal folding (quelques plis)

Je pense aussi aux differents pliages de Herman Van Goubergen. Chaque
annee, pour nos rencontres, il arrive avec un pliage nouveau et
totalement different des autres annees!
Par exemple:
- le dessus-dessous: un seul pliage en une seule feuille qui montre
un cygne vu de dessus et un poisson vu de dessous !
- un chat tout en rondeur sans plis marque a plat (presque de la
sculture), genial
- un bas-relief : tout a plat cette fois ci, mais en dessinant une
fresque qui ressort legerement (le gecko attrapant une mouche).
- un jouet en mouvement: la voiture qui roule: la herman-mobile
- pliage de lettres: lettre avec des ailes pour ce poster elle-meme
..
Et encore je ne connais pas tout!

Voila quelques exemples qui m'ont particulierement frappe, mais il y
en a bien autres...

Vincent
 _______                                                     _____
|       | Osele Vincent (Toulouse/France) Membre du MFPP    /|    |
|       | osele@worldnet.fr                                /_|    |
|       | http://www.worldnet.fr/~osele/origami.htm       |       |
|_______| -----------------> ORIGAMI -------------------> |_______|





Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 14:43:38 -0400 (AST)
From: jfryer@lib.ursinus.edu
Subject: star with crane

I just visited the aviary gallery on the Origami Club of Pittsburgh
homepage.  That's quite an impressive group of birds.  I've never seen
the Christmas Star with Crane by Edwin Yang.  Is it diagrammed anywhere,
or can someone describe the "key" to it?  I was able to do it with the
crane attached to the bottom point of the star, but not to the center as
in the photograph.         Thanks.      Judith
                                      jfryer@lib.ursinus.edu





Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 14:55:27 -0400 (AST)
From: GDScott@aol.com
Subject: online fabric origami workshop

Thanks to all those who have written and for your patience.

This web site features (fabric or paper) origami photos, matching diagrams,
book reviews and list.  It covers various techniques and has complete
instructions with a FAQ page.

Happy holidays and enjoy!

Glenda Scott
http://www.owt.com/gdscott





Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 16:01:40 -0400 (AST)
From: DORIGAMI@aol.com
Subject: Re: non-convex paper (square?...#10 or so

Two observations I have made about the square....first the Egyptian pyramids
are designed on a square (significant?)  Have always wondered why they used a
four sided pyramid instead of a 3 sided pyramid.  This has always seemed kind
of mystical and related somehow to the math of origami, and as I recall there
is a mantra that has something to do with the circle inside of the square.
 You go outside of the circle into the square.  I think that when people
started to go from the  confines of a single sheet of paper to the expandable
Origami world of unit origami they expanded their creativity.  Allowing for
the explosion of considering more closely the math of origami. This likens to
going outside of the circle into the square and allowed for origami becoming
much more interesting and much more creative.  IMHO.  Where else can we
go......Origami has taken such surprizing turns and twists in the last
decade.  It never fails to surprize me.  Confining to square origami.  Just
look at what Laura Kruskal does with 8 1/2 by 11 paper.  She finds endless
possibilities.  And this size paper is far more abundent in the US than any
other paper.  Dorigami (dorothy Kaplan)





Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 17:26:11 -0400 (AST)
From: Doug Philips <dwp+@transarc.com>
Subject: Re: The Forms of Origami (Part One)

Joseph Wu wrote, regarding Origami Animals by Hector Rojas:
+I agree that the Rojas book is rather pathetic. Not only does he resort to
+cutting, but also to painting his models. If an origami piece is not
+identifiable by its form (and perhaps from having the back and front colours
+of the paper), then it does not deserve to be called an origami model of
+whatever it's supposed to be. I would not, however, use the word "papercraft"
+as a curse, though. I'd rather call his work "poor/bad origami".

While I too find objection to calling Rojas' book origami, it is for
completely different reasons.  But what I am interested in here is Joseph's
stated objections.  ;-)  And I'm "picking" on Joseph as an example, as I have
heard similar sorts of arguments from other people about other models.

The objection to "painting" models doesn't seem to me to be a valid one.

What is the difference between painting a model and starting from prepared
paper?  Surely I will not create a display quality model of an elephant if I
fold it from NEON PURPLE paper.  So, if I choose a nice grey paper (say
paper code named "elephant hide") to make my elephant from, how is that any
different from starting with copier paper and "painting" the final model?
And does a folded eagle model deserve more praise if I choose a multicolored
paper that "happens" to have a patch of white in a spot which I know will
become the head of the eagle and some black in a place that I know will
become the talons?  Is this "bald" eagle ANY more praiseworthy than one
which is folded from solid brown or black paper and then painted white?  And
is a flower model any more praiseworthy if I fold it from "anatomicly
correct" duo paper than if I fold it from white paper and color it
afterwards?  What if I fold it from white paper, take that model apart, then
color another white piece, in advance of folding, to match the colors I wish
to have visible in the final model?  What if I take that a few steps further
and backcoat two sheets of paper to get the colors I want.  Or even worse,
what if I make my own paper with the texture _and_ color that I want?
Clearly I must be folding a very "poor/bad" origami model if I must resort
to such means!

-Doug





Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 18:24:18 -0400 (AST)
From: DLister891@aol.com
Subject: Re: Styles de pliages

Vincent points out that without going outside the boundaries of conventional
 "one-piece-of-paper-without-cuts" Origami, there are many styles of
"ordinary" Origami. Vincent cites some of the styles of Paul Jackson and
Herman Van Goubergen.

Yes, indeed! When I dreamed of writing a book about the styles of Origami,
many of the styles I would have included would have been within the
boundaries of "ordinary" Origami.

But here again, how you distinguish one style from another is a matter of
definition, and definition in a field such as this is very much a matter of
taste or of choice.

I have in the past distinguished between folding based on a "grid" structure
and that based a "radial" structure. (the idea is not my own - it has been
around for at least seventy years.) In simple origami folding, models based
on these two priciples are quite distinct, but as folding becomes more
complex, grid and radial folding run into each other and both grids and
radials will be found in the crease patterns of the piece of paper when the
model has been unfolded. And yet, very advanced folding still tends to divide
between "technical folding", which develops radial forms and "box-pleating"
(I prefer the term "box-folding" ) whch uses pleats in the form of a grid.

Dividing up Origami by sorting models into styles is very useful, because it
helps us to understand how different techniques are used and combined to
create models and to perceive how the mechanics of folding work. But as I
have previously said, systems of classification are man-made and should not
come between us and our appreciation of the great variety of paperfolded
models.

I was interested to read Vincents listing of three kind of folding of PauL
Jackson.

My own classification of simple folding has been somewhat different:

1. CURIO folding. (CURve Induced Origami); This is Paul Jackson's style where
he puts a limited number of folds in a piece of paper which create a stress
in the paper resulting in curved forms having great beauty. The style may
only use several creases or one crease, but it is then very different from
the one-crease folding in the catagory "minimal folding", below

2.Pure Land Folding.   This is the style of simple folding devised by John
Smith which uses only mountain and valley folds and which was intended in its
origins to help in finding simple folds for handicapped people, but which has
unexpectedly thrown considerable light on the processes of paperfolding.

3. Minimal folding.   In this style the number of creases permitted is
severely limited, usually to a maximum of five. It results in a very
constrained style of folding, while at the same time it requires great
imagination and creativity. (One-crease origami is merely an extreme form of
minimal folding, and as I have said, it must be distinguished from one-crease
Curio folding).

But those are only my own distinctions which have helped me to perceive some
of the richnesses of simple folding. Other people may find other patterns
helpful. Nobody is finally "right".

David lister.

Grimsby, England.

DLister891@AOL.com





Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 18:36:59 -0400 (AST)
From: jdharris@post.cis.smu.edu (Jerry D. Harris)
Subject: Re: The Forms of Origami (Part One)

>So, if I choose a nice grey paper (say
>paper code named "elephant hide") to make my elephant from, how is that any
>different from starting with copier paper and "painting" the final model?

        The difference is that if you were to unfold the painted model, not
all of the paper would be painted -- only those areas which were exposed to
the external world after the model is folded would have paint on them.
I've seen instructions for a few models -- the one that springs right to
mind is a "Lovebird" model in one of Kawai's books -- that begin with
instructions on where to paint (or otherwise color) the regions of the
square with different colors so that the finished model comes out with the
appropriate colors in the correct places.

        I must admit I'm somewhat torn on this issue -- after all, such as
in the lovebird, there are more colors/shades present in the real animal
than can be accounted for with ordinary origami paper which has a maximum
of two colors (one colored side, one white one).  As everyone knows, there
are "dyed" origami papers available with multiple colors and color
progressions (usually in cross-shapes of some sort), but I'm unaware of any
(organismal) models that are able to sufficiently utilize this.  However,
I'm unaware of how to accurately fold an origami model of an organism that
has >2 colors without resorting to such pre-prepared paper coloring!
Folding a lovebird, for example, from one- or two-color origami paper would
produce a model that almost everyone would probably declare was a parrot;
it's really almost the colors of the living bird that make it stand apart
(though an ornithologist would probably be able to cite other differences)
from other psittacids (I think the lovebird is a psittacid).

>And does a folded eagle model deserve more praise if I choose a multicolored
>paper that "happens" to have a patch of white in a spot which I know will
>become the head of the eagle and some black in a place that I know will
>become the talons?  Is this "bald" eagle ANY more praiseworthy than one
>which is folded from solid brown or black paper and then painted white?  And
>is a flower model any more praiseworthy if I fold it from "anatomicly
>correct" duo paper than if I fold it from white paper and color it
>afterwards?  What if I fold it from white paper, take that model apart, then
>color another white piece, in advance of folding, to match the colors I wish
>to have visible in the final model?  What if I take that a few steps further
>and backcoat two sheets of paper to get the colors I want.  Or even worse,
>what if I make my own paper with the texture _and_ color that I want?
>Clearly I must be folding a very "poor/bad" origami model if I must resort
>to such means!

        While these are good questions in their own right, I think Joseph's
point (correct me if I'm wrong here, Joseph!) was that it's less...well,
what's a good word here???...less "impressive" to fold and paint a model
than it is to fold a model in which the folding process produces the same
result.  Which do you find more impressive:  a bald eagle folded from
bi-color paper where the folding process produces a white head and a
colored body, or an eagle where someone had to paint the head (either
before or after)?  Which is more impressive:  a simple folded horse onto
which someone has painted black or white stripes to make a zebra, or
something like John's "Zebra" in which the folding process of a
black-and-white piece of paper produces a horse with stripes?  Granted, one
can get more detail with the paint -- real zebra stripes are much mroe
slender and oscillatory than the ones produced in John's model, but there
are limitations with the paper!  8-D

        I know people will probably take exception to my use here of
"impressive."  I speak here only from experience in showing non-origamists
a variety of models:  they invariably are more impressed with the complex
folding processes that produce correct color patternings than they are with
models that have been colored after the fact.

Jerry D. Harris                       (214) 768-2750
Dept. of Geological Sciences          FAX:  768-2701
Southern Methodist University
Box 750395                            jdharris@post.smu.edu
Dallas  TX  75275-0395                (Compuserve:  102354,2222)

                                              .--       ,
                                         ____/_  )_----'_\__
                                 ____----____/ / _--^-_   _ \_
                         ____----_o _----     ( (      ) ( \  \
                       _-_-- \ _/  -          ) '      / )  )  \
"Evolution: It's      _-_/   / /   /          /  '     /_/   /   \
Not For Every-       //   __/ /_) (          / \  \   / /   (_-C  \
Body!"              /(__--    /    '-_     /    \ \  / /    )  (\_)
                   /    o   (        '----'  __/  \_/ (____/   \
  -- Michael       /.. ../   .  .   ..  . .  -<_       ___/   _- \
     Feldman       \_____\.: . :.. _________-----_      -- __---_ \
                    VVVVV---------/VVVVVVVVV      \______--    /  \
                         VVVVVVVVV                   \_/  ___  '^-'___
                                           _________------   --='== . \
                     AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA--- .      o          -o---'  /





Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 19:09:34 -0400 (AST)
From: Doug Philips <dwp+@transarc.com>
Subject: Re: The Forms of Origami (Part One)

+of two colors (one colored side, one white one).  As everyone knows, there
+are "dyed" origami papers available with multiple colors and color
+progressions (usually in cross-shapes of some sort), but I'm unaware of any
+(organismal) models that are able to sufficiently utilize this.

Whether you, or I, happen to know of any specific model or not isn't the
point, since there such models are theoretically possible.

There are many papers available, some even specificly marketed as
"origami paper" which have more than one color per side.  Yet I have never
heard of anyone claiming that models made from such are "bad origami."

+        While these are good questions in their own right, I think Joseph's
+point (correct me if I'm wrong here, Joseph!) was that it's less...well,
+what's a good word here???...less "impressive" to fold and paint a model
+than it is to fold a model in which the folding process produces the same
+result.

I can only go by what Joseph has written, and what he wrote specificly
mentioned painting.

+         Which do you find more impressive:  a bald eagle folded from
+bi-color paper where the folding process produces a white head and a
+colored body, or an eagle where someone had to paint the head (either
+before or after)?  Which is more impressive:  a simple folded horse onto
+which someone has painted black or white stripes to make a zebra, or
+something like John's "Zebra" in which the folding process of a
+black-and-white piece of paper produces a horse with stripes?  Granted, one
+can get more detail with the paint -- real zebra stripes are much mroe
+slender and oscillatory than the ones produced in John's model, but there
+are limitations with the paper!  8-D

Aha!  But this is precisely NOT the point.  The point is, how much is the
model _itself_ judged on the basis of the paper requirements:
    color:
        duo paper  (each side a different color)
        mono paper (both sides the same color)
        "traditional"  (colored on one side, white on the other)
        "patterned" (either on one side or both sides)
        etc...
    texture:
        kami
        washi (also interacts with color)
        foil backed
        elephant hide
        etc.

Your criteria of "impressiveness" is a comparison between different models
of the same subject.  I am challenging the notion that "for the same model"
there is no arguable difference between whether the paper is
colored/textured before or after it is folded when it comes to judging a
model's quality.

-Doug





Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 19:09:16 -0400 (AST)
From: cathypl@generation.net (Cathy Palmer-Lister)
Subject: Re: The Forms of Origami (Part One)

>The objection to "painting" models doesn't seem to me to be a valid one.
>
>What is the difference between painting a model and starting from prepared
>paper?  Surely I will not create a display quality model of an elephant if I
>fold it from NEON PURPLE paper.  .......................... Or even worse,
>what if I make my own paper with the texture _and_ color that I want?
>Clearly I must be folding a very "poor/bad" origami model if I must resort
>to such means!
>
>-Doug

I folded a lion and a flying horse to illustrate a scene from the Chronicles
of Narnia.  The paper was unbleached, and the models came out looking like
something ceramic.  I'm itching to paint them,  they're just crying out, "I
need colour!  I need glaze!  I want to be alive!"

    Cathy





Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 21:32:28 -0400 (AST)
From: Steven Casey <scasey@enternet.com.au>
Subject: Re: decorating paper

At 05:26 PM 20/12/96 -0400, Doug Philips wrote:

>While I too find objection to calling Rojas' book origami, it is for
>completely different reasons.  But what I am interested in here is Joseph's
>stated objections.  ;-)  And I'm "picking" on Joseph as an example, as I have
>heard similar sorts of arguments from other people about other models.
>
>The objection to "painting" models doesn't seem to me to be a valid one.
>
>What is the difference between painting a model and starting from prepared
>paper?

I think there are two separate issues here, the first issue raised by Joseph
Wu was that some of the models by Rojas, were totally unrecognizable as the
subject they modeled and were simply a canvas where the features were drawn
or painted in. Any feature could be drawn in to any shape.

The second issue raised by Doug Philips is about objecting to models folded
from decorated or pre-painted paper.

Neal Elias has prepared paper by pre-colouring and a lot of paper comes
pre-printed. Even normal origami paper has a white and a coloured side. And
there's also duo paper. What color you choose comes down to personal taste.

Paper coloured on both sides is often easier to create from if the subject
requires only one colour, white one side coloured the other is often more
difficult to design with. You might expose the other side of the paper in
the legs and it causes the models to look funny. On the other hand this
effect can be put to good use when modeling animals like skunk's or panda's.
Your utilizing both sides of the paper and people can perceive what you've done.

What you choose depends on your own standard, I like a challenge so I like
to choose paper with white one side coloured the other for the sheer puzzle
element.

Cheers,

Steven Casey
scasey@enternet.com.au
Melbourne Australia





Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 00:31:16 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <origami@planet.datt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: decorating paper

On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, Steven Casey wrote:

=At 05:26 PM 20/12/96 -0400, Doug Philips wrote:
=>While I too find objection to calling Rojas' book origami, it is for
=>completely different reasons.  But what I am interested in here is Joseph's
=>stated objections.  ;-)  And I'm "picking" on Joseph as an example, as I have
=>heard similar sorts of arguments from other people about other models.
=>The objection to "painting" models doesn't seem to me to be a valid one.
=>What is the difference between painting a model and starting from prepared
=>paper?

=I think there are two separate issues here, the first issue raised by Joseph
=Wu was that some of the models by Rojas, were totally unrecognizable as the
=subject they modeled and were simply a canvas where the features were drawn
=or painted in. Any feature could be drawn in to any shape.

That's what I meant, all right. Rojas' models are ambiguous collections of
appendages, some formed by folding, some by cutting, and, for the most part,
unrecognizable without the painted details. It is not just the painting I
object to, but the fact that without the painting, the models are more-or-less
nothing. I feel that a model should be able to stand on its own. It may be
enhanced by painting, or what have you, but if it is not recognizable from the
folding, it has failed. And, as you have already noted, I have allowed for the
paper to be different colours on its two surfaces.

=The second issue raised by Doug Philips is about objecting to models folded
=from decorated or pre-painted paper.
=Neal Elias has prepared paper by pre-colouring and a lot of paper comes
=pre-printed. Even normal origami paper has a white and a coloured side. And
=there's also duo paper. What color you choose comes down to personal taste.

Again, with Elias' models, the coloration is an enhancement, but is not
necessary to the model's "success".

Doug goes on to talk about the various patterned papers. I have no problems
with those. I've even designed models that take advantage of them (e.g. one of
my orchid designs works very well with the so-called "concentric corners"
paper). But, as I seldom diagram, it's not a known model (at least to Jerry or
to Doug). 8) I find it more challenging to work with a given paper, patterns
and all, than to use decorations as a last resort, to salvage a model that
would not otherwise work.

          Joseph Wu           Faith: When you have come to the end of all the
  origami@planet.datt.co.jp   light that you know and need to step into the
 Webmaster, the Origami Page  darkness of the unknown, Faith is knowing that
http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami one of two things will happen: either there will
 Webmaster, DATT Japan Inc.   be something solid to stand on or you will be
    http://www.datt.co.jp     taught how to fly.                --Anonymous





Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 00:41:16 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <origami@planet.datt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: The Forms of Origami (Part One)

On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, Doug Philips wrote:

=Whether you, or I, happen to know of any specific model or not isn't the
=point, since there such models are theoretically possible.

True. And, as I've mentioned, I've done a few.

=+        While these are good questions in their own right, I think Joseph's
=+point (correct me if I'm wrong here, Joseph!) was that it's less...well,
=+what's a good word here???...less "impressive" to fold and paint a model
=+than it is to fold a model in which the folding process produces the same
=+result.
=I can only go by what Joseph has written, and what he wrote specificly
=mentioned painting.

Right. I did. And I apologise for not being clear enough. It's the use of
paint to rescue an otherwise poorly-designed (and unrecognisable) model that I
object to.

=Your criteria of "impressiveness" is a comparison between different models
=of the same subject.  I am challenging the notion that "for the same model"
=there is no arguable difference between whether the paper is
=colored/textured before or after it is folded when it comes to judging a
=model's quality.

It's a reflection on the design process. Was the design conceived of in such a
way as to take advantage of (or to work within the constraints of) a
particular piece of paper? Or was the subsequent use of colour/texture
required in order to hide a poor design? I will hasten to add, before Robert
Lang jumps on my case again for broaching the touchy-feely "what's going on in
the mind/heart of the creator" topic again, that sometimes it's not clear from
the final model which of the two cases is true. However, in many cases,
especially in Rojas' case, it is obvious that without the painting, the models
are not very good at all (well, many of them, anyway).

          Joseph Wu           Faith: When you have come to the end of all the
  origami@planet.datt.co.jp   light that you know and need to step into the
 Webmaster, the Origami Page  darkness of the unknown, Faith is knowing that
http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami one of two things will happen: either there will
 Webmaster, DATT Japan Inc.   be something solid to stand on or you will be
    http://www.datt.co.jp     taught how to fly.                --Anonymous





Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 00:53:45 -0400 (AST)
From: "NIGEL POTTLE, TEACHER LIBRARIAN, JAMES FOWLER SENIOR HIGH"@Owl.nstn.ca
Subject: Christmas and pigs

I'm off on Holiday so must sign off for several days, but wanted to say I
did finally manage to get Joseph Wu's "When Pigs Grow Wings and Fly" (Thanks
to Mark's Origami Olio Page), and folded it tonight. Of course in my hurry
I just grabbed a piece of paper and gave it a first go. It looks good
considering my quick attempt, but I will do another with better paper and more
patience when I return.

I must thank Joseph for his ingenuity and generosity in sharing his designs
with us. I also thank him for his insight and additions to this list. I won't
library and didn't bother to fold a single thing. 'Nuff said.

Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year folders. It's been great sharing
with you throughout 1996, and I look forward to being with you again in 1997.

Christmas Cheer and Wassails to all.

Nigel Pottle
npottle@cbe.ab.ca





Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 01:06:57 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <origami@planet.datt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: Christmas and pigs

On Sat, 21 Dec 1996 NIGEL POTTLE, TEACHER LIBRARIAN, JAMES FOWLER SENIOR
     HIGH@Owl.nstn.ca wrote:

=I'm off on Holiday so must sign off for several days, but wanted to say I
=did finally manage to get Joseph Wu's "When Pigs Grow Wings and Fly" (Thanks
=to Mark's Origami Olio Page), and folded it tonight. Of course in my hurry
=I just grabbed a piece of paper and gave it a first go. It looks good
=considering my quick attempt, but I will do another with better paper and more
=patience when I return.

Well, as they say, practice makes perfect!

=I must thank Joseph for his ingenuity and generosity in sharing his designs
=with us. I also thank him for his insight and additions to this list. I won't
=comment on the discussion re Rojas, except to say I borrowed it from the
=library and didn't bother to fold a single thing. 'Nuff said.

Thank Mark, rather, for diagramming the beastie. Who know when I would've
gotten around to it! More ramblings about Rojas from me just a little while
ago. Apologies for repeating myself!

=Christmas Cheer and Wassails to all.

"Here we come a-wassailing among the leaves of green,
  Here we come a-wassailing so fair to be seen..."

8)

A hearty Was Hael! to you all!

          Joseph Wu           Faith: When you have come to the end of all the
  origami@planet.datt.co.jp   light that you know and need to step into the
 Webmaster, the Origami Page  darkness of the unknown, Faith is knowing that
http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami one of two things will happen: either there will
 Webmaster, DATT Japan Inc.   be something solid to stand on or you will be
    http://www.datt.co.jp     taught how to fly.                --Anonymous





Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 14:50:10 -0400 (AST)
From: Nick Robinson <nick@homelink.demon.co.uk>
Subject: paint, glaze etc.

Cathy Palmer-Lister <cathypl@generation.net> sez

>I'm itching to paint them,  they're just crying out, "I
>need colour!  I need glaze!  I want to be alive!"

In which case, the designs are not up to it, IMHO. Great works don't
rely on colour, paper, paint(!), glaze etc. Dave Brill reckons if a
design doesn't look good in plain brown paper, it's missing something. I
tend to agree.

all the best,

Nick Robinson

Origami, Improvised Guitar, Internet consultancy and Web design!

email           nick@homelink.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/nick
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/
DART homepage   http://www.shef.ac.uk/uni/projects/oip/dart/
RPM homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk





Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 16:48:59 -0400 (AST)
From: John Smith <jon.pure@paston.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Styles de pliages

At 06:24 PM 12/20/96 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>My own classification of simple folding has been somewhat different:
>
>1. CURIO folding. (CURve Induced Origami); This is Paul Jackson's style where
>he puts a limited number of folds in a piece of paper which create a stress
>in the paper resulting in curved forms having great beauty. The style may
>only use several creases or one crease, but it is then very different from
>the one-crease folding in the catagory "minimal folding", below
>

>David lister.
>
I think that I had better comment on your description of CURIO folding. Many
years ago Paul Jackson explained to me his ideas in which he tries to get
peopleto see the inherent beauty of paper when it takes on various curves.
Usually Paul in his superb presentations encourages people to use just one
fold which does not reach the boundary of the paper at one end of the
crease. He encourages them to begin to see and create beauty by revealing
the abstract forms for themselves.

These ideas were a great stimulous for me but my idea was to use the curves
to create models. I had long been disatisfied with the idea of using water
to mould paper as this seems to me to fight against the inherent beauty of
paper.

In 1990 in my booklet Patterns in Paper I explored the kind of curves which
resulted from this approach and referred to it as 'Jacksonian' folding as a
tribute to Paul. I am sorry to say that Paul took a dim view of this mainly
because I was missing the point of his work which is awaken the sense of
beauty and creativity in people. However I still wanted to pursue the idea
of using these induced curves in models so I decided to call what I was
trying to do 'CURIO' folding. I gave a little exhibition of some of my
models and other people at Otsu,Japan in 1994 and tried to show in my
lecture how CURIO could expand the richness available to folders which would
still stay within the simple but wonderful constraints of paper and just
folding.

I have given up hope that the proceedings at OTSU will ever be published
(that is a real tragedy).For those who are interested Paul has wriiten an
excellent paper of his ideas in the BOS magazine No.173. My paper given at
OTSU is in BOS No. 172. I am hopeful that one day some of the great creators
will take up the challenge of CURIO folding and begin a new and wonderful
chapter in Origami.

John.

John Smith
Norwich
England
e-mail  jon.pure@paston.co.uk





Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 17:51:53 -0400 (AST)
From: Oded Streigold <benjic@netvision.net.il>
Subject: Isrealy origami page

Hi everyone!

 I'm happy to annouce that I have updated my origami page at Geocities,
along with a    page fot the Origami Art Society in Israel.

 My origami pages address is:
 http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/9398

 From there you can go to the society's page at:
 http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/9398/israel1.htm

 Bye!!

 Oded.

 benjic@netvision.net.il





Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 17:58:50 -0400 (AST)
From: casida@ere.umontreal.ca (Casida Mark)
Subject: Re: Fr: Styles de pliages

Vincent a ecrit :

> Je pense aussi aux differents pliages de Herman Van Goubergen. Chaque
> annee, pour nos rencontres, il arrive avec un pliage nouveau et
> totalement different des autres annees!
> Par exemple:
> - le dessus-dessous: un seul pliage en une seule feuille qui montre
> un cygne vu de dessus et un poisson vu de dessous !
> - un chat tout en rondeur sans plis marque a plat (presque de la
> sculture), genial
> - un bas-relief : tout a plat cette fois ci, mais en dessinant une
> fresque qui ressort legerement (le gecko attrapant une mouche).
> - un jouet en mouvement: la voiture qui roule: la herman-mobile
> - pliage de lettres: lettre avec des ailes pour ce poster elle-meme
> ..
> Et encore je ne connais pas tout!

Voila un mystere pour moi.  J'ai entendu-dire des pliages merveilleuses
de M. Van Goubergen (surtout le gecko attrapant une mouche) mais je n'ai
jamais eu le plaisir de les voir (sans meme mentionner les plier).  Est-ce
qu'il a publie des diagrammes pour ses modeles ou y a-t-il une site WWW
ou on peut les voir?

                                 Joyeux Noel et Paix dans le Nouvel An,
                                            Mark

--
*-------------------------------------------------------*
|          Mark E. Casida                               |
|          e-mail: casida@chimcn.umontreal.ca           |





Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 18:11:20 -0400 (AST)
From: casida@ere.umontreal.ca (Casida Mark)
Subject: Re: Isrealy origami page

Oded wrote:

>  My origami pages address is:
>  http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/9398

I am unable to read the lines after the dots using Netscape 2 and my black
and white X-terminal.  However clicking in that general area gives me pages
of instructions for folding a shogi piece.  Thanks Oded.  Shogi is one of
the world's best board games.

                                       ... Mark

--
*-------------------------------------------------------*
|          Mark E. Casida                               |
|          e-mail: casida@chimcn.umontreal.ca           |





Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 18:22:21 -0400 (AST)
From: Steven Casey <scasey@enternet.com.au>
Subject: Re: paint, glaze etc.

At 02:50 PM 21/12/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Cathy Palmer-Lister <cathypl@generation.net> sez
>
>>I'm itching to paint them,  they're just crying out, "I
>>need colour!  I need glaze!  I want to be alive!"
>
>In which case, the designs are not up to it, IMHO. Great works don't
>rely on colour, paper, paint(!), glaze etc. Dave Brill reckons if a
>design doesn't look good in plain brown paper, it's missing something. I
>tend to agree.
>
>all the best,
>
>Nick Robinson
>

I can't see how you can judge a _design_  by some ones preferences to paint
or glaze them. What if the very model was a Brill model!

Its a matter of taste, but a really good origami model doesn't "need"
enhancement. Decorating a perfectly well designed, origami model seems
disrespectful to the designer, IMHO. In origami "less is definitely more".

In respect to brown paper, it's a great medium to design with. It's no good
for perceiving two colour models like penguins, skunks, panda's etc. You
need the contrast in the paper surface's to _perceive_  the two colors.

all the best,

Steven Casey
scasey@enternet.com.au
Melbourne, Australia





Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 23:06:03 -0400 (AST)
From: Mark Morden <marmonk@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Joseph Wu's When Pigs grow wings...

At 11:13 AM 12/19/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Now that I have a graphic browser I am finally able to look at and drool over
>the wonderful diagrams on everyone's home pages. I do remember seeing a message
>from Joseph Wu that his "pigs..." diagram was available somewhere on the web.
>Having looked at the photo I am eager to try it out. Can you point me in the
>right direction?
>
>Nigel Pottle
>npottle@cbe.ab.ca
>
>
The diagrams are on my Origami Olio.  The address is in my .sig file below.
Go to the Gallery II page. (it is clearly marked.)

Thanks

Mark

Mark Morden == marmonk@mail.eskimo.com
http://www.eskimo.com/~marmonk/
--------------------------------------------------------
I believe in Christianity as I believe that the Sun
has risen; not only because I see it, but because by it
I see everything else.
                       C.S. Lewis, "The Weight of Glory"





Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 07:08:35 -0400 (AST)
From: DLister891@aol.com
Subject: Re: Styles de Pliages;  Jacksonian and Curio Folding

John Smith rightlly takes me to task for confusing the artistic folding of
Paul Jackson (in which he places one or two, or perhaps three creases in the
paper which do not necessarily extend to the edge of the paper) with John's
own use of stressed foding in order to create models.

Paul's use of "stressing" is to create sculptural forms of beauty. John's is
the more mundane one of creating models. I saw his collection of CURIO models
at Utsu and they pointed the way to a wholly new style of Origami. They were
not complicated, but neither need CURIO folding of John's kind nessarily be
simple.
If Paul looked with disfavout at John's ideas, then I cannot agree with him.
John's is a different style, with different objects, which in no way
conflicts with or debases  Paul's artistic style.

If we are to limit "CURIO" folding to John's style, then what are we to call
Paul's. The name "Jacksonian Folding" has often been used, but this style of
folding need not be limited to Paul. Can anyone think of another more general
name?

I now have five, not four catagories of folding in this group:

1.     Jacksonian Folding.

2.      CURIO Folding.

3.       Pure Land Folding.

4.       Minimal Folding.

5.       One-crease Folding.

As I have said before, classification is useful to help us to analyse the
different kinds of folding and to distinguish styles which may be
superficially the same, but which are really different. But classification
should not blind us to Folding itself and it must never be allowed to become
a constraining strait-jacket

David Lister.

Grimsby, England.

DLister891@AOL.com.





Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 11:52:37 -0400 (AST)
From: Steve Woodmansee <stevew@empnet.com>
Subject: Re: paint, glaze etc.

        In all of the discussions regarding paint, glaze and other
accoutrement, I believe we have made one fact abundantly clear:  Origami, as
an art form will not be pigeon-holed.
        One may as well start a discussion as to whether post-impressionist
art is 'better' than impressionist or purely representational art.  Does
performance art count?  Yet another discussion is born.
        Thus, as with painting and other art forms, we must agree to
disagree and acknowledge that 'papercraft', as pointed out by Joseph Wu
earlier last week, should encompass a wide variety of paper treatments.
This means that even within the Origami fold (couldn't resist, sorry) we
must allow for those who prefer to paint and accessorize their finished
models versus those who view such treatments as heresy.

Personal Philosophy - Origami painters, glazers, etc. read no further!
======================================================================

        Personally, (here comes my $.02), I agree with those who've said
that if a completed model does not stand on its own merits it is not a
worthwhile model.  I cringe when I see Origami books featuring models with
eyes painted on, sequins, glitter, etc.  And hypocritical or not I do *not*
find it at all offensive if the paper I start out with has special features
(foil, duo-tone, etc.), since it is only a starting material - it's still up
to me to make it into something.  Decorating my models would make me feel as
if I were trying to disguise a failure.  (If only I could!)
        As for those who decorate their models after the folding is
completed, I've come to view this as a personal preference.  My
mother-in-law is fond of painting flowers on the walls of her home, various
furniture, lampshades and even on the side of her automobile.  Not what I
would call tasteful, but it's a charming aspect of her personality.  I
imagine if she ever picks up Origami as a hobby, the models will be
festooned with feathers, buttons, doll eyes and anything else that strikes
her fancy.  So be it.

        As I step off my wobbly soapbox, I ask that you all allow me at
least two minutes to run and hide before instigating any mob action.

                         ''~``
                        ( o o )
+------------------.oooO--(_)--Oooo.------------------+
|                                                     |
|          "Origami: Welcome to the Fold!"            |
|                Steve Woodmansee                     |
|              Bend, Oregon U.S.A.                    |
|                                                     |
|                    .oooO                            |
|                    (   )   Oooo.                    |





Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 13:42:10 -0400 (AST)
From: cathypl@generation.net (Cathy Palmer-Lister)
Subject: Re: paint, glaze etc.

>
>In which case, the designs are not up to it, IMHO. Great works don't
>rely on colour, paper, paint(!), glaze etc. Dave Brill reckons if a
>design doesn't look good in plain brown paper, it's missing something. I
>tend to agree.
>
>all the best,
>
>Nick Robinson

        I agree, it has to look good in plain brown paper, but I love
colour--you should see my computer screen!
        The designs of the lion and Pegasus are great, they look like they
deserve the kind of care you would want to give a ceramic figure.  Would you
want all your ceramic ware in plain terracotta?
        Usually, I do not keep my origami.  It's only paper, and the joy is
in the folding.  Once done, it's done.  I don't keep completed crossword
puzzles, either, no matter how long I struggled with them.  When I decide to
keep something, it's because it has something more.  These two designs were
not my first folding of these figures, but they were the ones that came out
looking most like little statues, and so, I have this temptation to paint them.

                                                        Cathy





Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 14:24:41 -0400 (AST)
From: cathypl@generation.net (Cathy Palmer-Lister)
Subject: Re: paint, glaze etc.

Hi, Steve!
>
>        Personally, (here comes my $.02), I agree with those who've said
>that if a completed model does not stand on its own merits it is not a
>worthwhile model.

        I tend to agree with that.

I cringe when I see Origami books featuring models with
>eyes painted on, sequins, glitter, etc.

It has happened to me to be impressed by a picture of a finished model, only
to be disappointed when I fold it myself.  Unfortunately, I do have to get
books like that because I teach young children.  I keep looking for simple
designs that are kid-friendly.  And kids most certainly wll decorate their
models!  (and everything else they can get their little hands on, copybooks,
lockers....)

  Decorating my models would make me feel as
>if I were trying to disguise a failure.  (If only I could!)
>

Well, I think that's the point.  You CAN'T hide a bad design.  In fact, I
believe decorating a bad one only accentuates its weak points.  The trouble
with some books is that the photographers really know their stuff!

 As for those who decorate their models after the folding is
>completed, I've come to view this as a personal preference.  My
>mother-in-law is fond of painting flowers on the walls of her home, various
>furniture, lampshades and even on the side of her automobile.  Not what I
>would call tasteful, but it's a charming aspect of her personality.  I
>imagine if she ever picks up Origami as a hobby, the models will be
>festooned with feathers, buttons, doll eyes and anything else that strikes
>her fancy.  So be it.

Well, it is supposed to be fun, isn't it?  And your mom sounds like somebody
who enjoys life.  Did I tell you I was a Klingon?  Puts a little spice into
sci-fi conventions!  What should I wear to an origami convention, if ever
there should be one in Montreal?

                            Cathy
