




Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 14:33:50 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Hershey Nugget "chocolate with almonds" candy wrappers

Or a folded sheet of origami instructions
could be included in every bag of candy.

Or they could hold an origami model competition
using their wrappers. (Grand Prize: a lifetime
of free Hershey Kisses and dental care :-)

Same goes for gumwrappers and PostIts(tm).

I haven't tried the kisses wrappers, but I have
done modular origami from the Hershey miniature
bar wrappers. And the chewing gum wrapper Sonobe
unit variation on my web pages can be used with
quite a few rectangular papers, not just gum wrappers.

--valerie
Valerie Vann
75070.304@compuserve.com
http://users.aol.com/valerivann/index.html





Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 15:06:50 -0400 (AST)
From: Peter and Mary Ansoff <Peter_Ansoff@compuserve.com>
Subject: [NO] "From" Address

A short time ago, COMPUSERVE changed its EMail address system a little and
I had to re-subscribe to the list.  Since then, I've noticed a peculiar
phenomenon.  Some of the messages that I receive from the list have the
actual sender's name and address in the "From" line, while others have the
origami-L address in both the name and address fields.  I've compared some
samples and cannot figure out why some work one way and some the other way.

Before I resubscribed all messages came with the actual sender's name and
address in the "From" line, and I sort of liked it that way.  Any ideas
about what's causing this?

Thanks,

Peter Ansoff
peter_ansoff@compuserve.com





Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 15:16:54 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: Alex's new web URL

If you're having trouble getting onto Alex Barber's
new web page address, try one of these:

http://198.64.43.75/origami/       [put slash at the end]

or

http://198.64.43.75/origami/index.html   [literal including file name]

These both worked using AOLv3.0 browser and Compuserve's Spry Mosaic,
so they should work with the new stuff like MSE and Netscape.

--valerie





Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 15:45:42 -0400 (AST)
From: Dennis Brannon <brannon@jamin.enet.dec.com>
Subject: RE: Hershey Nugget "chocolate with almonds" candy wrappers

I consider it a major milestone that Hershey used origami in
their commercial.  Think of how many millions now have that
self folding wrapper still folding and unfolding somewhere
in their brain and the gnawing question of "how did they do that?"

Maybe someday they'll even figure out its called origami...

Adding origami instructions to the bag would cost money
and would probably not lead to increased sales, unfortunately.
Unless it was tied into some kind of contest or TV show.
It will be interesting to see what they do for their next commercial.

I'd settle for their Web page mentioning the word origami
in a description of the Hershey Nuggets commercial.

dennis

Dennis Brannon
brannon@jamin.enet.dec.com
Littleton, MA, USA





Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 16:06:22 -0400 (AST)
From: Lisa.Hodsdon/McDougal/hmco@Owl.nstn.ca
Subject: about 100 traditional models

Here's one for the historians, I guess.

I just ran across the following in a math text-book: "There are about 100
traditional origami figures, most showing natural forms such as birds, flowers,
and fish."

Does anyone have any idea where that "about 100" might have come from?
Does anyone have an educated guess as to whether that is about correct?

I don't see anything along these lines in a quick cruise through Kenneway's
_Complete Origami_. In Engel's _Folding the Universe_ I found: "But there
were few other developments, and until the resurgence of origami in this
century, only about 150 simple models, handed down from generation to
generation, remained to attest to a millennium of Japanese folding." (p. 20
of the Dover edition) But, that doesn't sound like the source of the quote
from the text.

Thanks.
Lisa
Lisa_Hodsdon@hmco.com





Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 16:57:12 -0400 (AST)
From: Kenneth Lehner <lehner@lznj2.lincroftnj.ncr.com>
Subject: FW: Hershey Nugget "chocolate with almonds" candy wrappers

>I haven't tried the kisses wrappers, but I have
>done modular origami from the Hershey miniature
>bar wrappers.

I have the Lang Ant made from a Hershey's Cookies and
Mint miniature wrapper sitting on my workstation.  The paper-backed
foil  was square.  And preparing the foil was a heck of a lot more fun
than gluing foil to paper :-)

Ken Lehner





Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 16:57:36 -0400 (AST)
From: Kenneth Lehner <lehner@lznj2.lincroftnj.ncr.com>
Subject: RE: All cats good, all dogs....

>From: Dennis Brannon

>My cat (short hair tiger) ignores anything made out of paper and views
>origami
>as a waste of finger movement that could be spent scratching her neck.
>However, my brother's cat (long hair black) loves to shred paper and is
>fascinated
>by anything with lots of points.  She bats them around and chews on them a
>little
>bit, but is careful not to shred them.

I finally got around to making Engel's Dollar Bill Crab.  I left it sitting
on the
TV at home.  One day, my wife holds up two halves of a flattened (creased
but not folded) dollar bill, wondering where it came from.  I can only guess
that it was what was left of the crab after the cat took it apart.  The dogs
would've eaten it.  They got my Montroll raccoon :-(

Ken Lehner





Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 20:45:42 -0400 (AST)
From: Jean Villemaire <boyer@videotron.ca>
Subject: Re: Alex's new web URL

Valerie Vann wrote:
>
> Alex Barber's new web page address, try one of these:
> http://198.64.43.75/origami/       [put slash at the end]
> so they should work with the new stuff like MSE and Netscape.

It does with Netscape.  Thanks Valerie.  Who would want to miss Alex's page?

Jean Villemaire





Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 21:07:41 -0400 (AST)
From: Ronnie White <ronew@mindspring.com>
Subject: Origami Sighting

  On the CBS Evening News tonight (Friday 28 March) there was a story about
all the articles left at the site of the Oklahoma bombing. In the room where
alot of this is warehoused was a very large display of origami cranes. The
woman in charge of these articles commented on the vast numbers of cranes
that they have received. It was very short, did anyone else see this?
Ron White
ronew@mindspring.com

"Never underestimate the incredible destructive power of origami"

                                                  Earthworm Jim





Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 08:07:35 -0400 (AST)
From: ROBINMACEY@aol.com
Subject: Digitizing Tablets

Hi Everyone

I am planning to have a go at doing some origami diagrams on computer. I am
thinking about purchasing a digitizing tablet to make this easier and
wondered if anyone with experience of using such a device for diagrams could
let me know what features I should look out for and what makes and models
they recommend. Are they a very big time saver over using a mouse alone?

I currently use a Pentium P75 & have recently purchased a copy of Coreldraw
4.

Thanks.

Happy Easter

Robin Macey
Nottingham, ENGLAND
email  robinmacey@aol.com

PS   The British Origami Society is 30 years old this year and is holding a
very special Origami Convention in York, England on 19-21 September 1997.
Anyone interested in attending can email me privately for more details.





Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 14:33:47 -0400 (AST)
From: DLister891@aol.com
Subject: Re: "About 100 Traditional Models".

In her message dated 28/03/97  22:03:22, Lisa Hodsdon wrote

<< I just ran across the following in a math text-book: "There are about 100
 traditional origami figures, most showing natural forms such as birds,
flowers,
 and fish."  Does anyone have any idea where that "about 100" might have come
from? >>

For some years now, I have been gathering information about traditional
models, collecting notes about them in a separate file, but I have still not
reached the stage where I can give an informed reply to Lisa's question.

There are several difficulties to be overcome. First. there is the question
of what is a traditioanal model. All models originate with some person,
although, like folksongs, some of them evolve as they are passed from hand to
hand , until no one person could be said to be the designer. They then
qualify as traditional. Other models simply have nor known creator.

Second, many traditioanal folds are closely similar to each other. How
distinctive does a model have to be before it can be said to be distinct and
separate? It is rather like biological taxonomy. When is a sub-species
sufficiently distinct to qualify as a full species in its own right?

Third, models may sometimes be thouht to be traditional, when, in fact, they
ae not. For some time, the Magic Tipper was thought by members of the BOS to
be traditional and only later did we discover that it had been created by a
Japanese folder.

Having said that, I venture the opinion that in the West, the number of
traditional models in, say, 1950, that is before the modern development of
paperfolding, did not exceed about fifty and even that figure may be too
high.

In Japan, there were many more traditional models from the very simple young
 children's models to more elaborate ones. Again, I can do no more at this
stage than to take a stab in the dark and suggest a figure of 150.

I should be interested to have more details of Lisa's math text-book. What
was its name, who was the author, where was the book published and i what
year? Was it referreing to only western models or to eastern models as well?

I don't know where Peter Engel got his own figure of 150 from, but it clearly
relates to Japanese folding and is exactly the same as my own. The point he
is making is not the actual number of traditional models, but the remarkably
small number of origami figures that were known before what he calls "the
modern resurgence of origami". I share his surprise at the low number. I
would, however, point out that even before the modern growth of origami,
there were created models that had a known authorship in addition to the
traditioanl ones.

Oner day, I may get round to making a list of traditional models. A
comprehensive survey would throw considerable light on the history of
paperfolding. But at present, other things I have embarked upon have prority
and I can make no promises. What I should like to see would be a
comprehensive book of traditional models, as complete as possible, with
diagrams for each one and where appropriate and account of the known history
of each model. But I rather think that that would be too ambitious.

In the meantime, I will continue to collect traditonal models - it is quite
surprising how often additions to my collection come to light. I shall always
be pleased to hear from anyone coming across a "New" traditional model.

David Lister

Grimsby, England.

DLister891@AOL.com





Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 16:00:38 -0400 (AST)
From: Cathy Palmer-Lister <cathypl@generation.net>
Subject: Re: The cost of "Brilliant Origami"?

At 04:12 AM 3/21/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Just had a quick call from Dave Brill, who has noticed a couple of price
>variations on his book in the States & wondered if you could give him a
>little feedback.
>
>Those of you who have seen/bought it; did you pay $20, $27 or some other
>price?
>

I paid $30.95 + taxes in Montreal, Canada.

                                                        Cathy





Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 16:25:34 -0400 (AST)
From: Norm Lillibridge <norman_lillibridge@eee.org>
Subject: Re: The cost of "Brilliant Origami"?

Cathy Palmer-Lister wrote:
>
> At 04:12 AM 3/21/97 -0400, you wrote:
> >Just had a quick call from Dave Brill, who has noticed a couple of price
> >variations on his book in the States & wondered if you could give him a
> >little feedback.
> >
> >Those of you who have seen/bought it; did you pay $20, $27 or some other
> >price?
> >
>
> I paid $30.95 + taxes in Montreal, Canada.
>
>                                                         Cathy
I paid $20.00 + tax in Southern California in 1996.
                                      Norm





Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 19:58:17 -0400 (AST)
From: bc808@lafn.org (Karen Liebgott)
Subject: cat models

>I love origami (and cats) and I'm right handed.
>I personally agree with Nick that we need more cat models.
>Any suggestions?  (on cat models or on getting your cat NOT to tear up your
>models)

There is a lion cub in "Brilliant Origami." It's not an easy model though...

 Karen Liebgott, kel@cwia.com
 www.geocities.com/RainForest/4271





Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 20:41:56 -0400 (AST)
From: Steve Theil <theil@htonline.com>
Subject: Origami-L: Re: Digitizing Tablets

Robin said: "I am planning to have a go at doing some origami diagrams on
computer. I am thinking about purchasing a digitizing tablet to make this
easier and wondered if anyone with experience of using such a device for
diagrams could let me know what features I should look out for . . ."

Hi Robin,

I've been using an older version of CorelDRAW to make origami diagrams for
several years. I don't have a digitizer; I just use the tools in the
program. It works great for my modest talents, and is lots of fun.

It may be because I'm really stupid, but I don't know how a digitizer would
make creating the diagrams any easier. In fact, it seems like it would just
get in the way. All the tools you need are really on the keyboard.

I would be very happy, however, to be enlightened.

Whichever way you do it, though, good luck, and have fun! Diagramming with
CorelDRAW is fascinating.

Best wishes,
Linda Theil
theil@htonline.com





Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 21:03:18 -0400 (AST)
From: jdharris@post.cis.smu.edu (Jerry D. Harris)
Subject: Re: cat models

>>I love origami (and cats) and I'm right handed.
>>I personally agree with Nick that we need more cat models.
>>Any suggestions?  (on cat models or on getting your cat NOT to tear up your
>>models)
>
>There is a lion cub in "Brilliant Origami." It's not an easy model though...

        I keep hearing about Herman von Goubergen's "Cat" model as one of
the best around, but I have yet to see it for myself.  8-C  Would anyone
out there be willing to send me a xerox of the instructions?  I'd be happy
to exchange for instructions for something else or recompense for copying
costs if it's not too much...

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)

"Science _does_ have all the answers -- we just don't have all the
science."
                        -- James Morrow





Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 22:13:45 -0400 (AST)
From: "James M. Sakoda" <James_Sakoda@brown.edu>
Subject: Re: Digitizing Tablets

>Hi Everyone
>
>I am planning to have a go at doing some origami diagrams on computer. I am
>thinking about purchasing a digitizing tablet to make this easier and
>wondered if anyone with experience of using such a device for diagrams could
>let me know what features I should look out for and what makes and models
>they recommend. Are they a very big time saver over using a mouse alone?
>
>I currently use a Pentium P75 & have recently purchased a copy of Coreldraw
>4.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Happy Easter
>
>Robin Macey
>Nottingham, ENGLAND
>email  robinmacey@aol.com
>
I once owned such a board but did not make much use of it.  I would suggest
that you start with the drawing program, which has everything you will need
to do drawings properly, including providing for custom made dotted lines.
It is possible to hold up a partially folded model up on the screen and
make an outline of it, usually using the polygon tool.  This will provide
the means of starting drawings, which is what you might also get with a
drawing board, but you will have the additional problem of transferring it
to a drawing program, which does a lot more, such as provide shadings,
duplication of one diagram to do the next one, enlarge and shrink drawings,
etc.  James M. Sakoda

James M. Sakoda.  Web Page for origami drawings in compact PDF form:
http://idt.net/~kittyv  .
Requires Adobe Acrobat Reader 3.0 which can be downloaded free from
http://www.adobe.com/acrobat





Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 08:51:44 -0400 (AST)
From: Robert Allan Schwartz <notbob@tessellation.com>
Subject: Re: When is a sub-species ...

>Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 13:31:41 -0500 (EST)
>From: DLister891@aol.com
>To: origami-l@nstn.ca
>Subject: Re: "About 100 Traditional Models".
>Message-ID: <970329133141_1683021181@emout06.mail.aol.com>
>
[snip]
>
>Second, many traditioanal folds are closely similar to each other. How
>distinctive does a model have to be before it can be said to be distinct and
>separate? It is rather like biological taxonomy. When is a sub-species
>sufficiently distinct to qualify as a full species in its own right?
>
[snip]
>
>David Lister
>
>Grimsby, England.
>

Biologically and taxonomically, a sub-species becomes a full species when
it can no longer reproduce with members of the species it used to be in.

How is this related to origami? I recall a recent discussion here about the
gender of pajaritas ... :-)

Robert
>DLister891@AOL.com

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Allan Schwartz       | voice (617) 499-9470  | Freelance instructor
955 Massachusetts Ave. #354 | fax   (617) 868-8209  | of C, C++, OOAD, OODB
PO Box 9183                 |
Cambridge, MA 02139         | email notbob@tessellation.com

URL   http://www.tessellation.com/index.html

"Physicists are wrong. The world is not divided between matter and
antimatter. The world is divided between pasta and antipasta."





Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 14:43:01 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: FW: Hershey Nugget "chocolate with almonds" candy wrappers

Ken Lehner wrote:
<<preparing the foil was a lot more fun>>

Got that right; amazing how much you can get prepared
in a short time, 'specially if you work in an office full of
chocoholics with a "company candy jar" in the coffee room..

I made a neat little NASA Space Shuttle a couple of years ago,
but can't remember how I did it; have been avoiding unfolding it,
and so far no good results with the occasional reverse engineering
effort, so I suspect there may have been a judgement fold or two..

--valerie





Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 14:42:18 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Origami-L: Re: Digitizing Tablets

I suspect that Robin has been looking at the newer digitizing
tablets that you can "draw" with similar to a pencil. I tried
a digitizing tablet of this sort several years ago, but gave
up on it; the technology was too immature. At the time (and
still today with engineering/architectural drafting programs
such as AutoCAD), a digitizing tablet was mainly used as a
separate "screen" of menus, and you made your menu selections
with the digitizer pen. There would also be a small area on
the pad where you could place a drawing to digitize the
coordinates of the line segments, calculate areas, etc.
Otherwise the pen is just moved around on the tablet similar
to a mouse, for which it substitutes, while the operator
"draws" on the main computer screen.

I found these older pens to be awkward and tiring to use and
the tablets were not sensitive (insufficient "point density")
enough for drawing. The newer tablets intended for art work
are much more sensitive, and some come with cordless, well
balanced pens that feel and work more like a pencil. Some even
have "erasers", and drawing/art programs (as distinguished from
CAD programs, which work with lines/vectors primarily) that
support these newer tablets allow you to choose the type of mark
the pen makes (charcoal or pencil textures, etc.) and you can
use them much more like a real drawing medium.

So I have been re-considering them recently. One drawback for
me is that they usually require a serial port (RS232);
most PC's only come with 2, getting more put on can be difficult
or impossible to configure (mouse takes one; you may be out of
I/O addresses or IRQ's or both), and I've already got 3 serial
devices, 2 parallel devices, 6 SCSI devices, etc. Plus there is
usually the old problem of getting so many device drivers loaded
onto your system that some software hasn't enough memory to run,
though this is less of a problem with Win95 and NT (provided
you can get an NT driver, that is) So connecting
one will probably be a problem. But they look like they could
now be really useful for folks like me who know how to draw
with a pencil or pen; I usually draw my diagrams first by
hand, as I can do the 3-D views much faster by hand than on
the computer.

I have recently seen advertized devices that will "split" a serial
port for you, allowing you to have two input devices active at
the same time, either two different mice or a mouse and a
digitizer, so apparently some techie out there is working on the
problem.

I still do most of my diagrams with an old CAD program called
GenericCAD (from the AutoCAD folks, but abandoned by them a couple
of years age), as I find doing geometrically intensive work in
the drawing programs (Corel, etc.) hopelessly awkward and time
consuming; unfortunately, GenericCAD lacks a custom line type
facility, though there is a third party add-on, you still can't
get a "real" mountain fold symbol (if someone of the few other
GenCAD users has solved this, please share your secret...)

Lately I've discovered I can draw much better "freehand" with
a mouse than I used to be able to, and have done some quickie
diagrams using the old Paint program included in Windows (no
rotation capability though); at least with it I can "bit-fiddle"
in the raster editing mode and get whatever linetypes I need.

--valerie
Valerie Vann
75070.304@compuserve.com





Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 14:42:44 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: RE: Hershey Nugget "chocolate with almonds" candy wrappers

Sure putting directions in the packages would cost.
But probably infitesimally; you're always finding
coupons and stuff folded up and stuck inside bags
and boxes. And the cost of the candy itself is
a tiny fraction of the product cost; they probably
spend much much more on promotion and packaging.
They're selling an idea, after all, not basic nutrition.

On the other hand, putting diagrams on their Web site
would be cheap, although if they've used anything but
traditional designs, they might have to pay somebody
a small fee; and if they drew their own, even that
wouldn't be necessary. (That would be legal, but a
breach of origami ethics; they'd probably hear from me
and half the origami-L about it :-)

--valerie
Valerie Vann
75070.304@compuserve.com





Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 14:42:05 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: about 100 traditional models

Lisa Hodsdon wrote:
<<math text..100 models>>

Lisa, you and Pat Slider and David Lister are a constant
source of entertainment to me, coming up with such
intriguing tidbits of origami lore, odd books and paper
sources, trivia and history! :-)

I hope you realize what you've done here:
This is bound to touch off a flurry of lists of candidates
for the "100 or so traditional origami models":

Crane (of course)
"Measuring Box" (blinzed square box, height 1/2 side of square
Incense burner box (triangular legs)
"Offering Boat" ("Chinese junk")
Tatu (hexagonal, octagonal)
Flower kusudama, sewn together style
Flower kusudams, glued at petal tips
Snapper/popper noisemaker
Jumping frog
Talking "lips", "frog", whatever (USA "cootie catcher")
Basic airplane
Ninja throwing star (Britain)
Troublewit (accordian pleated multipurpose gizmo; Britain?)
..

[a short time later]
Sure enough, David Lister has weighed in on this issue;
I was sure he would have a list going.

David, have you though of contacting P.D. Tuyen, the Vietnamese
author of "Classic Origami" and "Wild Origami", which a couple
of us found rather intriguingly different? Tuyen seemed too be
working in relative isolation from the rest of the origami world,
apparently unaware of developments in creation of realistic
animals particularly. Since "Classic Origami" was published in
Germany, I at first thought he was a Vietnamese immigrant to
Germany, working in some technical field (he is a draftsman of
some skill), but I was still puzzled, as he seemed also oblivious
though "new" bases appear occasionally (Montrol "dog" base and
some Yosizawa "bird" bases come to mind, along with what
I consider modular "bases").

Anyway, reading the two books more closely (and a little between
the lines), it seems that Tuyen is a Vietnam citizen, *has*
been working in relative isolation, and has developed his models
virtually independently, building on models learned as a child.

Some of these might be different than the basic Japanese "set" or
Chinese "set" of childhood/traditional origami, even as the
traditional/schoolhouse/childhood origami of the USA, Britain,
and Spain (pajarita) differ from the Asian. (I learned "cootie
catchers" and airplanes at 7 or 8 in the schoolyard; I didn't
learn the classic crane until much later from a comic book that
had "activities" and games; even then, the book called it a "swan".)

I've noticed that there are not only traditional models, there
seem to be traditional techniques and/or sequences for folding
them; e.g. the classic bird/crane base is often diagrammed by
Japanese authors in a way that lends itself primarily to folding
in the air (as Master Yoshizawa insists is the correct way of
folding his designs), rather than on a flat surface. And some
variations of folding sequence yield better, more accurate and
more consistent results. I've found this to be true in modular
origami also; sometimes angles and "fit" result best from the
cummulative "errors" of a certain sequence of "landmarkings"
and folds.

It might be interesting to find out if the Vietnamese/S.East Asian
paperfolding traditions include models unknown or less common
elsewhere, or other techniques of folding, and Tuyen would seem
to be a possible source of information relatively unaffected by
contact with other folding traditions.

--valerie
Valerie Vann
75070.304@compuserve.com





Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 14:41:30 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: [NO] "From" Address Compuserve

Peter,

I discussed this with Compuserve's techies, and got
as usual conflicting signals. They're constantly
tinkering with the mail server, trying to get it to
a point of being fully internet standard without losing
the old user software compatibility.

I don't like it either; it was sort of a nuisance to have
to manually change the address of replies to the origami-L
back to the listserver address, but at least you could scan
your mail box by sender as well and subject. Maybe they'll
change back; AOL's mail box shows the original sender on
origami-L traffic.

GO to feedback on compuserve and complain about it; you'll
get a really dumb response, but at least they'll have heard
from one more of us. (Do it in the WinCim support forum too.)

--valerie
Valerie Vann
75070.304@compuserve.com
valerivann@aol.com





Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 14:42:30 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: When is a sub-species ...

David Lister wrote:
<<when it will no longer mate with the original..>>

Well, I suppose we could apply that to modular origami:
If the modules "will no longer" mate, it must be a new
"species"...

Though modular origami is still, like nature, a source
of amazement to me: considering that it's based on geometry,
which has been around since the Greeks (at least) it's a
wonder anyone can still come up with something new.

This reminds me of an incident in "creativity" last fall:
I was making Master Yoshizawa's monkey for the OUSA Holiday
Tree gifts, and I took a wrong turn on one and ended up with
a variation on the back legs and tail, so I kept that one, and
one other that was a little messily folded. I had them standing
on my desk with a bunch of other animals (in picking animals
for the "gifts" I ended up working my way thru a couple of
Lang & Montroll books for the first time in a long while).

I had the two monkeys, which were facing the same direction
standing together in what *I* thought of as a comradely position,
one with its arm over the others shoulder. Until my brother
came by one day and asked "Is that what you mean by

--valerie
Valerie Vann
75070.304@compuserve.com





Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 17:07:47 -0400 (AST)
From: Charles Knuffke <knuffke@sirius.com>
Subject: Re: The cost of "Brilliant Origami"?

>Just had a quick call from Dave Brill, who has noticed a couple of price
>variations on his book in the States & wondered if you could give him a
>little feedback.
>
>Those of you who have seen/bought it; did you pay $20, $27 or some other
>price?
>

Looking at the page after the title page in my copy of Brilliant Origami,
the publisher is listed as Japan Publications, but there are different
distributors listed for the US, Canada, UK & Europe, Australia & New
Zealand, and for the Far East & China.

My copy of Brilliant Origami, which I bought at a US bookstore, has the
price shown on the back cover of $20.00, which is what I paid.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Charles Knuffke       "Amen the Thunderbolt in the Dark Void"
153 Divisadero                                  -Jack Kerouac
San Francisco CA 94104
mailto://knuffke@sirius.com





Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 18:04:14 -0400 (AST)
From: DMAWolf@aol.com
Subject: Re: ORIGAMI-L digest 673

On the subject of the candy wrapper folding.  Do they have a twelve step
program for  folders to get cured.  The reponse and the diversity of the
answers finally convinced my husband I am not the only one who cannot be
trusted with the movie tickets until AFTER we get into the movie.
On to the subject some ad agency is missing a sales hook.  I have had people
from all over ask if I can make those.  I tell them I can but the chocolate
is not on the low fat diet so I will have use other paper.  Keeps me from
having to figure out the odd size paper problem as will as the round body
problem from eating all that chocolate.
  For those counting: Left handed, cat and dog lover ( animal magnet),
allergic,  happy paper hoarder.
Diana Wolf
Artist in Residence Paper Artist
Phoenix, Az
Without Origami we would live in flat world.





Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 23:40:20 -0400 (AST)
From: "Shi-Yew Chen (a.k.a. Sy)" <sychen@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Digitizing Tablets

At 08:07 AM 3/29/97 -0400, Robin Macey wrote:
>>
>I am planning to have a go at doing some origami diagrams on computer. I am
>thinking about purchasing a digitizing tablet to make this easier and

I wish I know more about tablet and diagramming before posting this. I
can sort of "imagine" the convenience without actual testing. Are you
talking about putting digitizing pointer over the actual folded model to
enhance/speed the positioning? It can help on 2D/flat models (I guess)
but not 3D model or 3D illustration. It would be another issue if you
are really a good pen sketcher/painter. Besides that software plays an
important role. Make sure the main diagramming software does support the
tablet device or you need to find the convenient way to convert/import
the graph.
As for the 3D drawing I would go for the digital camera/video capturing
solution. You can auto trace the captured image or create vector image
manually by clicking/moving mouse pointer over the bitmap image. This is
just one of my future investment proposal. I am no expert of
diagramming. You still need to test it before making final decision.

|------------------------------------------------------\
|  _     Shi-Yew Chen (a.k.a. Sy) <chens@asme.org>     |\
| |_| Folding http://www.erols.com/sychen1/pprfld.html --\





Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 01:21:54 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <origami@planet.datt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: My torment has ended!!!!  & MORE

On Thu, 27 Mar 1997 Jeff Kerwood wrote:

=Is there any paper that would be good for making tessellation or troublewit
=lamp shades?

Some of the heavier washi is pretty good for such purposes.

=I got several good replies about how to divide paper into thirds (even
=5ths).  But how about 9ths (yuck!!!)?  Is it time for the ruler?

Divide into thirds. Divide each third into thirds again. Easy, no? 8)

=My last question:  I am feeling %-( because you guys are using more of these
=emoticons than I know.  I don't want to diminish the mystic but I really
=must know, what does "8^(", and, "8-D" and, "8-Z" (and others) mean.

Take a look at this page "Emoticons!" web page:
<http://www.cs.cornell.edu/Info/People/ckline/humor/msg00016.html>

The ones you specifically ask about are:
8^(   unhappy person with glasses and a broken nose
8-D   laughing person with glasses
8-Z   cross person with glasses (I think...)

=I have asked lots of questions in previous emails and just want to say what
=a cool group of people you are.  THANKS for all the responses.  Special
=thanks to Joseph.  He has proven true to his reputation - Friendly and
=Knowledgeable and seems to answer most every email.  THANKS Joseph.  I am
=glad to have found such a friendly origami family.

I have a reputation? Uh, oh. I didn't know that. Does this mean I have to live
up to it? The pressure! I can't take it anymore! Aaaaaaaaaaaaah! 8)

Seriously, if I can help, I try to do so. But I rely on information that I've
acquired from many sources, including the many folks here on this list. And I
do make mistakes, as the people here know! As long as we keep helping each
other, I guess it's all right. 8)  (BTW, where did you hear about this
"reputation" of mine?)

 Joseph Wu - origami@planet.datt.co.jp - http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami
> It's your privilege as an artist to inflict the pain of creativity on
yourself. We can teach you how WE paint, but we can't teach you how YOU
paint. There's More Than One Way To Do It.
> Have the appropriate amount of fun.    --Wall, Christiansen, Schwartz





Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 01:54:08 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <origami@planet.datt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: Digitizing Tablets

Robin Macey wrote:

=I am planning to have a go at doing some origami diagrams on computer. I am
=thinking about purchasing a digitizing tablet to make this easier and
=wondered if anyone with experience of using such a device for diagrams could
=let me know what features I should look out for and what makes and models
=they recommend. Are they a very big time saver over using a mouse alone?

And Shi-Yew Chen (a.k.a. Sy) responded:

=I wish I know more about tablet and diagramming before posting this. I
=can sort of "imagine" the convenience without actual testing.

I have a graphics tablet (Wacom) that I bought for diagramming purposes. I
find that I don't like it for that. This is probably because I am much more
used to the mouse for drawing on a computer, and if I spent as much time
getting used to the tablet as I have spent using the mouse, I think I could
become more proficient with it. The chief difficulty with using a tablet is
that it feels like a pen. Usually, when I draw with a pen, I have feedback
under the pen (the line is there right where the pen just was). However, with
the tablet, the pen moves over the tablet surface, but the line appears on the
screen. I find that very difficult to work with. Also, the mouse uses relative
motion while the tablet uses absolute motion. Thus, with the mouse, you can
reposition your hand if the current position of it is not comfortable, and it
won't greatly affect what happens on the screen. However, with the tablet, you
must worry about where your hand is in relation to the tablet because that
affects where the cursor is on the screen.

In summary, the mouse is easier, in my mind, than the tablet for precise
diagramming because there is that level of detachment between the input device
and the visible results. The link is much stronger with the tablet, so you are
tempted to look at two places at once (the screen and the tablet surface) in
order to figure out where exactly you are drawing. Having said all of that, I
do find the tablet to be a great tool for freehand drawing and sketching. I
also know of people who have gotten so used to the tablet that they prefer it
over a mouse. It's really up to you, and you must try it before you can say if
you like it or not.

=Are you talking about putting digitizing pointer over the actual folded model
=to enhance/speed the positioning? It can help on 2D/flat models (I guess) but
=not 3D model or 3D illustration. It would be another issue if you are really
=a good pen sketcher/painter. Besides that software plays an important role.
=Make sure the main diagramming software does support the tablet device or you
=need to find the convenient way to convert/import the graph.

Digitising a flat model could probably be done more easily by scanning the
image and then drawing the lines over it with a drawing program. The scan
could then be deleted leaving the drawn version.

Software drivers are not usually a problem. The driver installs into the
operating system and the software treats the device like a mouse. Some
programs will give extra functionality if they have been written to use a
special feature of the tablet/digitiser (e.g. Photoshop knows how to use the
"eraser" at the other end of my tablet's stylus).

=As for the 3D drawing I would go for the digital camera/video capturing
=solution. You can auto trace the captured image or create vector image
=manually by clicking/moving mouse pointer over the bitmap image. This is
=just one of my future investment proposal. I am no expert of
=diagramming. You still need to test it before making final decision.

This is precisely my suggestion for flat models, too, if you want to diagram
using a real model as your basis. Most diagrammers that I know of just look at
their models and then draw the diagram based on that.

 Joseph Wu - origami@planet.datt.co.jp - http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami
> It's your privilege as an artist to inflict the pain of creativity on
yourself. We can teach you how WE paint, but we can't teach you how YOU
paint. There's More Than One Way To Do It.
> Have the appropriate amount of fun.    --Wall, Christiansen, Schwartz





Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 02:27:48 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <origami@planet.datt.co.jp>
Subject: Tokyo visit: Yoshizawa and Origami Tanteidan (long)

I'm back from an absolutely fabulous visit to Tokyo, having enjoyed some great
hospitality. My thanks go to Mr. Yamaguchi for a place to stay, and for taking
so much time to keep me occupied. A full report will follow, but here are some
tidbits first, specifically things that were asked about here and that I had
promised to answer.

1. Business card folding. Basically, what I'd said before was correct. Folding
cards is not generally done, partly due to cultural bias, and partly due to
the fact that they just haven't thought about it! Mostly, there is no problem
to folding cards if they are your own, or if they are mistakes from a printer.
The problem arises when you fold cards given to you by someone else as that
would be an insult to them.

2. Both Yoshizawa and Yamaguchi (and some of the other Tanteidan) confirmed
that origami is not included in the Ningen Kokuhou (Living National Treasure)
because it is not highly regarded in Japan. As in the West, it is commonly
viewed as a children's pastime. Yamaguchi went on to confirm what I'd
mentioned before, that origami is not a "functional" craft like the ones
included in the Ningen Kokuhou (like pottery, metal work, etc.).

3. The Otsu proceedings are close to being completed and should be ready
sometime this year. Yamaguchi said that he and Maekawa are among those working
on it and told me to pester Maekawa into hurrying up. I did that when I had a
brief chance to talk to him on Saturday, asking on behalf of "everyone on the
Internet". 8)

4. Marcia Mau asked once about an origami museum that she'd heard about. It's
supposed to be in Gifu-ken (near Nagoya). Yamaguchi said that he hadn't heard
of it, but that it wouldn't be surprising if there were some small place that
showed off someone's personal work, or perhaps a government-run place showing
of various aspects of Japanese culture that happened to include origami. He
also mentioned a senbazuru display in Kuwana (I have no idea where that is).

5. Book in the works: a new book by Fuse on masks due out in the autumn
(Origami House employee Tajiri was working on it when I was there).

6. Diagrams from the west are being sought for the Tanteidan newsletter. I had
brought along the two latest issues of Imagiro, and the Tanteidan members were
most impressed with Jeremy Shafer's work, especially the "gremlin" (which
yawns and blinks) and the "glancer" (which moves its eyes back and forth).

7. This is sort of a pre-announcement. The full announcement will come later.
The Yoshino Memorial Fund, which was set up by the Tanteidan to honour the
late Issei Yoshino, will be used to invite young origamists from around the
world to attend the Origami Tanteidan Convention. One person will be invited
each year. Endorsements of and donations to the fund would be appreciated. One
person will be invited each year, expenses paid. If you would like to be
considered for an invitation, send a "self-recommendation" to the Tanteidan
explaining why you should be considered. This not limited to
creators/designers; people actively involved in promoting origami in some way
or other will also be considered (i.e. on the level of Don or Michael Shall,
or of V'ann Cornelius). Again, wait for more information on this one.

8. Following up on the previous item, the Origami Tanteidan Convention this
year will be on August 23 & 24 in Tokyo. This year's invitee has been
selected, but has not yet been contacted, so I won't divulge that person's
identity as of yet.

9. Anyone visiting Tokyo is invited to drop in and meet with the Tanteidan
members. Their monthly meeting is on the last Saturday of each month, and
there are always members dropping in at Origami House. Some meetings are
daytime ones, while others are nighttime, so you'll want to call ahead to find
out what's going on that particular month. Given enough warning, Yamaguchi can
provide a place to stay for one or two people.

 Joseph Wu - origami@planet.datt.co.jp - http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami
> It's your privilege as an artist to inflict the pain of creativity on
yourself. We can teach you how WE paint, but we can't teach you how YOU
paint. There's More Than One Way To Do It.
> Have the appropriate amount of fun.    --Wall, Christiansen, Schwartz





Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 02:46:21 -0400 (AST)
From: Rodney Fetveit <rodster@erinet.com>
Subject: Re: Alex's new web URL

I'm new to the Origami-L and have enjoyed all the mail I'm receiving. I
was woondering if anyone had a comprehensive list of web sites offering
origami directions?
Also I'm right handed, dog and cat lover (prolly leaning more towards
cat though). And also allergic (which kinda hinders the pet loving
process).

Thanx
Rodney





Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 03:38:31 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <origami@planet.datt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: ORU and stamps.

On Thu, 27 Mar 1997, John Smith wrote:

=I have just received a complementary copy of ORU,(as a contributor) . It is
=a tragedy that this superb magazine has to die. The latest issue is like all
=of the others that I have seen, beautifully designed, superb  photographs,
=and many challenging and remarkable works of Origami.
=Amongst the highlights for me, were some beautiful illustrations of
=Kawasaki's Origami crystals. There were some fine photographs of Paul's
=Jackson's one fold creations, and some attractive forms from Fumiaki Kawahata.
=I noticed also that was an advertisement for Kasahara's new book called the
=Joy of Origami, if the pictures are anything to go by this is a real classic.

I saw "Joy of Origami" at Origami House. Unfortunately, they sold out before I
could buy one. It's an intermediate level book with lots of commentary (all in
Japanese) and features models with his "half-opened crease" folding (where
space and form are created with creases that are not folded flat but left
open). He also has a large section with woven strips of paper used to form
objects (much like the Chinese strip weaving sculptures, or like the "Swedish
star"). Yet another craft on the fringes of origami. 8)

=There has been a request for details of Origami stamps recently. On page 65
=of this edition of ORU a number of stamps are illustrated. There appear to
=be four issues of Japanese Origami stamps, the well known set for Christmas
=Island, a stamp of the  classic boat from Costa Rica and a bird form in a
=stamp from Ecuador. There were also some Origami like stamps which appear to
=be from Thailand.

That's right. The page is divided into Japanese origami stamps and "overseas"
origami stamps.
Japanese:
 1980 - Fumi no hi (day of letters, the 23rd of each month, a joke on "fumi"
        meaning letter and "fu" and "mi" meaning 2 and 3, respectively) - 50
        yen: a pentagonal knot (formerly used as a way of sealing a letter
        after it had been folded into a strip)
 1994 - Orizuru (crane) - 40, 41, 60, 62, 80 yen: silhouette only.
 1962 - Tanabata (July 7, from Chinese mythology when the lovers represented
        by the stars Altair and Vega can cross the heavenly river [the Milky
        Way] to be with each other for one day a year) - 10 yen: origami
        hanging from a tree.
 1990 - International Congress of Mathematicians - 62 yen: a 12 unit modular
        using Sonobe's "colour box" unit.
 1996 - Umi no hi (Day of the Sea) - 50 yen: windmill base boat

Overseas:
 1996 - Ecuador - 1500 sucres: what looks like an origami bird. Oru expresses
        it as "orizuru nan no ka?" ("It's a crane, I guess?")
 1974 - Costa Rica - 85 centimos: hand holding a boat (pirate hat boat)
 1982 - Christmas Island - 27, 50, 75 cents (Australian): Joseph, angel, Mary
        with baby, respectively

=It is possible to buy many of the previous issues according to an
=advertisement in the magazine.

So far, yes.

=How I wish that I could read Japanese.

Me, too!

 Joseph Wu - origami@planet.datt.co.jp - http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami
> It's your privilege as an artist to inflict the pain of creativity on
yourself. We can teach you how WE paint, but we can't teach you how YOU
paint. There's More Than One Way To Do It.
> Have the appropriate amount of fun.    --Wall, Christiansen, Schwartz





Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 03:47:52 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <origami@planet.datt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: Alex's new web URL

On Mon, 31 Mar 1997, Rodney Fetveit wrote:

=I'm new to the Origami-L and have enjoyed all the mail I'm receiving. I
=was woondering if anyone had a comprehensive list of web sites offering
=origami directions?

Rodney also wrote me privately, specifically about finding instructions on my
site, but I'll respond here.

Take a look in the "Files and Diagrams" section of my site. There are links to
many diagrams, including the Postscript diagrams on my site, the Acrobat (PDF)
versions on Alex Baxters site, the origami archives, and also other various
diagrams lurking here and there. It's not a comprehensive list of diagrams, by
any means, but it's a start. A fairly comprehensive list of origami web sites
(with and without diagrams) can be found in the "Other Pages" section of my
site. I guess I should make a new category for those sites with diagrams, huh?

 Joseph Wu - origami@planet.datt.co.jp - http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami
> It's your privilege as an artist to inflict the pain of creativity on
yourself. We can teach you how WE paint, but we can't teach you how YOU
paint. There's More Than One Way To Do It.
> Have the appropriate amount of fun.    --Wall, Christiansen, Schwartz





Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 04:00:33 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <origami@planet.datt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: about 100 traditional models

On Sun, 30 Mar 1997, Valerie Vann wrote:

=Lisa, you and Pat Slider and David Lister are a constant
=source of entertainment to me, coming up with such
=intriguing tidbits of origami lore, odd books and paper
=sources, trivia and history! :-)

Aren't they great? They taught me everything I know. 8)

=I hope you realize what you've done here:
=This is bound to touch off a flurry of lists of candidates
=for the "100 or so traditional origami models":
=
=Crane (of course)
="Measuring Box" (blinzed square box, height 1/2 side of square
=Incense burner box (triangular legs)
="Offering Boat" ("Chinese junk")
=Tatu (hexagonal, octagonal)
=Flower kusudama, sewn together style
=Flower kusudams, glued at petal tips
=Snapper/popper noisemaker
=Jumping frog
=Talking "lips", "frog", whatever (USA "cootie catcher")
=Basic airplane
=Ninja throwing star (Britain)
=Troublewit (accordian pleated multipurpose gizmo; Britain?)

There is a danger here. While in Tokyo, I got a chance to see some of
Yamaguchi's books from about 20 years ago when he first started writing books
under the auspices of NOA. In them I found many models that I had thought to
be "traditional", but were credited to him. Whether they are really his or
whether he just diagrammed some traditional models and claimed them to be his,
I didn't ask, but there can be no doubt that he has them published. I even
found some of the so-called "tradtional" models in the Biddles' "Step-by-step
Origami" ("Essential Origami" for you Americans) in Yamaguchi's old books.
Even in the list above, the two different kusadama are his.

=David, have you though of contacting P.D. Tuyen, the Vietnamese
=author of "Classic Origami" and "Wild Origami", which a couple
=of us found rather intriguingly different? Tuyen seemed too be
=working in relative isolation from the rest of the origami world,
=apparently unaware of developments in creation of realistic
=animals particularly. Since "Classic Origami" was published in
=Germany, I at first thought he was a Vietnamese immigrant to
=Germany, working in some technical field (he is a draftsman of
=some skill), but I was still puzzled, as he seemed also oblivious
=to standard diagram conventions and the "bases" in particular,
=though "new" bases appear occasionally (Montrol "dog" base and
=some Yosizawa "bird" bases come to mind, along with what
=I consider modular "bases").

I *still* don't like his work, and I don't like the fact that he writes so
authoritatively for someone who hasn't done his homework. Your word,
"oblivious," seems a good one to describe him.

=Anyway, reading the two books more closely (and a little between
=the lines), it seems that Tuyen is a Vietnam citizen, *has*
=been working in relative isolation, and has developed his models
=virtually independently, building on models learned as a child.

Yes, that's what I gathered, too.

=Some of these might be different than the basic Japanese "set" or
=Chinese "set" of childhood/traditional origami, even as the
=traditional/schoolhouse/childhood origami of the USA, Britain,
=and Spain (pajarita) differ from the Asian. (I learned "cootie
=catchers" and airplanes at 7 or 8 in the schoolyard; I didn't
=learn the classic crane until much later from a comic book that
=had "activities" and games; even then, the book called it a "swan".)

Have we defined what should be included in these "sets" from the different
countries? I've made mention before of the fact that Chinese models tend to
work mainly with 90- and 45-degree angles, while the Japanese also
incorporates 22.5-degree angles (upon which I base my rather tenuous argument
that the Chinese did origami first, since their designs rely on "simpler"
folding than the Japanese).

=I've noticed that there are not only traditional models, there
=seem to be traditional techniques and/or sequences for folding
=them; e.g. the classic bird/crane base is often diagrammed by
=Japanese authors in a way that lends itself primarily to folding
=in the air (as Master Yoshizawa insists is the correct way of
=folding his designs), rather than on a flat surface. And some
=variations of folding sequence yield better, more accurate and
=more consistent results. I've found this to be true in modular
=origami also; sometimes angles and "fit" result best from the
=cummulative "errors" of a certain sequence of "landmarkings"
=and folds.

True. As for Yoshizawa, though, he often (in my presence, anyway) does like I
do and uses a flat surface to fold long folds, although he does have a way of
doing that in the air, too.

=It might be interesting to find out if the Vietnamese/S.East Asian
=paperfolding traditions include models unknown or less common
=elsewhere, or other techniques of folding, and Tuyen would seem
=to be a possible source of information relatively unaffected by
=contact with other folding traditions.

It would definitely be interesting. Anyone know how to contact Tuyen? Via the
publisher, perhaps?

 Joseph Wu - origami@planet.datt.co.jp - http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami
> It's your privilege as an artist to inflict the pain of creativity on
yourself. We can teach you how WE paint, but we can't teach you how YOU
paint. There's More Than One Way To Do It.
> Have the appropriate amount of fun.    --Wall, Christiansen, Schwartz





Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 04:31:08 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <origami@planet.datt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: NOA & ORU

On Tue, 25 Mar 1997, bleu wrote:

=I was wondering if any of you out there can send me the ISBN's of those
=two japanese magazines. Even though I don't know japanese at all ;o)
=I will like to get those magazines so to see how origamist work. The only
=way is to order them through my logal bookstore here in Athens, Greece
=and they told me they need the ISBN to do that.

Neither of those magazines have ISBNs. Oru is no more, but the 16 back issues
that exist (plus the two diagram books) can be ordered directly from Oru by
writing to them at

Quarterly ORU, Sojusha, Inc.
DIK Koishikawa 405
2-3-28 Koishikawa, Bunkyo-ku
Tokyo 112, Japan

Orders can be made in batches of six issues each (due to postal weight
restrictions). The prices (in yen) are as follows:

Issues                 1    2    3    4     5     6
Magazine            2060 4120 6180 8240 10300 12360
Postage & exchange
 fee (Europe & NA)  2280 3080 3680 4680  5280  5880

The exchange fee is 1500 yen and reflects the crazy situation with the
Japanese banks which charges an additional fee to cash international cheques.
Send your order (name, address, books wanted) and a cheque covering the costs
of your order to the above address. They ship upon receipt of the order.

For NOA, you must become a member to receive the magazine. Back issues are
also available. You can write them at

Nippon Origami Association
Dormir Gobancho 1-096
Gobancho 12, Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo 102, Japan

They have membership forms in English, I believe.

 Joseph Wu - origami@planet.datt.co.jp - http://www.datt.co.jp/Origami
> It's your privilege as an artist to inflict the pain of creativity on
yourself. We can teach you how WE paint, but we can't teach you how YOU
paint. There's More Than One Way To Do It.
> Have the appropriate amount of fun.    --Wall, Christiansen, Schwartz
