




Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 01:28:17 -0300 (ADT)
From: Marc Kirschenbaum <marckrsh@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: Origami doodles

At 12:48 PM 7/1/97 -0300, <brannon@jamin.enet.dec.com> wrote:

>In the Summer 1997 issue of Origami USA's The Paper is an
>article by Robert Lang called Origami Connections.
>
>In that article he says:
>"While in Japan, I visited several folding groups, and during one of these
visits
>I was designing new models by doodling circles inside a square.  This is a
>technique I had developed and used for several years, and my scrawls caught
>the eye of several people who recognized the doodles.  It seems I wasn't the
>only one using circles to design origami and through these doodles I made
>the acquaintance of Toshiyuki Meguro, who had developed his own circular
>doodles - not to mention his own flying beetles, spiny sea urchins, and a
>whole host of other point-rich designs."
>
>Why circles?   This sounds like an interesting design technique;
>could someone who uses this technique please explain a bit further?

The circles are used as a notation to define the area a particular
appendage will occupy on your square. All origami appendages "consume" a
certain amount of paper. To get a rough idea, you can take an apendage, and
fold it (from its origin), in as many directions as possible. This will
form a perimiter of creases around the base of the appendage. If you would
open your model up, you could then see the full perimiter of creases.

This perimiter of creases can be approximated by drawing a circle. It is
imprortant to note that only appendages comming from the middle of the
square are represented by full circles. Appendages from the edge are shown
with half circles, while appendages from the corners only need a quarter
circle.

With this understanding of how much paper the different types of appendages
consume (corner, side, and middle appendages), you can allocate space on
your square for each required appendage. You would first get a rough idea
where each of thge appendages sould originate from.For instance, with most
animal models, you would want the leg appendages to come from an area on
the square to the side of the head appendage.

The next step is to draw a circle around each appendage origin (the origin
being the center of the appendage, or the point in the paper that will
comprise the tip of the appendage). The idea is to make the circles as
large as possible, while still retaining the proportions desired. Idealy,
the circles will fill up the square, ane will touch each other.

Circles are used for a few reasons. Since they have an infinite number of
sides, they do not have to be in a particular orientation to allow them to
touch each other. For simmilar reasons, it is possible to draw connecting
lines from each appendages origin, and then add extra creases to fill it out.

I think at this point I should quit discussing this technique. I have yet
to use it for my own creations, as I do not find it the least bit
intuitive. However, many creators have found it to be quite fruitful, so it
is worth giving a try.





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 01:47:07 -0300 (ADT)
From: Marc Kirschenbaum <marckrsh@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: Are complex models sculpturesque?

At 09:23 PM 7/1/97 -0300, Alec wrote:

>Nothing wrong with complex, super complex, mega complex, or any of the
>complexeseseses! Is it folded from paper? Is it folded from one sheet? Was it
>folded without cutting, ripping, or tearing? Was it folded without glue or
>other adhesive? If you answer 'yes' to all of the above, what's the big deal?
>I prefer a Kawahata T-rex with teeth and toes to a Montroll T-rex with basic
>limbs. Not to say I don't love Montroll -- the man is genious -- but I find a
>certain beauty in the complexity. Gimme more Yoshinos, Maekawas, and
>Kawahatas! Was Warhol art? Is 'abstract art' admirable? Who cares! Stop the
>debate and fold! If you don't like it -- don't fold it!

I think the original point of my question was lost. Amongs origamists, we
will each have our preferences for either the more simplistic (my
preference), or the more ornate. This is fine; I am more interested in if
the non-origamist would mistake an origami work for something else, on
account of it's complexity. Could  you imagine a paintins so realistic, it
would be thought to be a photograph? While the pure aesthictic merits would
still be intact, the viewer might not be able to appreciate the incredible
technique that is involed to produce such a work. The same is true for
origai (as with all artistic forms). The art is appreciated on many levels,
most notably from an aesthetic, as well as a tecnical point of view.

With simple models, I think the technical aspect is more obvious. The eye
can more easily follow the pattern of folded edges that comprise the
model's structure. It is easy to see how clever the designer is.

I do not want to get into the aesthetics of the structure, as that is a
separate (and more subjective) issue. Of course, with enough public
awareness, the layman will eventually be able to  recognize the most
complex works a s being origami. As formyself, I often find I have to
convince people that my works are from single sheet of paper. Most of them
seem to trust me, so I rarely had to unfold a model to show them the truth.
It would be nicer if it could be more easily seen as origami. Any
additional thoughts on this?

Marc





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 01:47:23 -0300 (ADT)
From: Perry Bailey <pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net>
Subject: Re: Perry  & the Unicorn

Valerie Vann wrote:

> So let me know if you want me to put it in the
> archive (about a 3 minute job...)

yes thankyou
>
> Just one question:
> when do we get the diagrams for the Maiden?
> :-)

Maiden!!!!!!!????? :?)'
you mean "an instrument like the guillotine, formerly used in Scotland
for beheading"????
or did you mean that other definition that keeps fathers up late waiting
for teenage daughters to come home?
Perry
--
>From pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net

***************************************
* Your Life is only what you make it. *
* so make it good. :?)'               *





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 01:56:48 -0300 (ADT)
From: Marc Kirschenbaum <marckrsh@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: Convention '97

At 09:26 PM 7/1/97 -0300, JacAlArt@aol.com wrote:

>Maybe I'm ignorant, but I thought the convention was always in the Winter.
>Are there 2 a year, or are the times just different now? Anyway, when does
>the annual collection come out? That's my main question here.

THe OrigamiUSA Convention has allways been held around this time. There are
smaller conventions (really just orinized teching sessions), that are held
thoughout the year, known as Special Sessions.

As for the Annual Collection, it is always scheduled to debut at the big
Convention. It is one of the few parts of the Convention Experience you can
take home with you. Afterwards, the Annual Collection (alonng with older
collections), is made available through The Source.

Speaking of the Annual Collection, OrigamiUSA is about to start to make a
new one for 1998. If you have diagrams, you can even e-mail them to me
directly (NOT to the list) at marckrsh@pipeline.com. Ther earlier, the better.

Marc





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 02:09:59 -0300 (ADT)
From: Marc Kirschenbaum <marckrsh@pipeline.com>
Subject: Foil backing (was RE: Paper for Rose)

At 05:12 PM 7/1/97 -0300, John Marcolina <jmarcoli@cisco.com> wrote:
>At 04:42 PM 7/1/97 -0300, you wrote:
>(snip :-)
>>Any suggestions for drying the sheets?  I usually give them 10 minutes to
set,
>>pry them free from the newspaper, and drape them over a wooden chair back
>>to dry overnight.  That removes the temptation for my cat to walk across
them
>>and prevents the foil from permanently bonding with the newspaper.  It is
also
>>a good check to catch any part that didn't get enough glue.

>I cut my square(s) immediately after glueing, and throw away the sticky
>edges, then let the sqares dry overnight. Since they no longer have any
>exposed glue, they're easier to store at this point, although you want to be
>sure to let them dry in a ventilated area.

I found the above statements to be rather odd. I never give my foil backed
papers any drying time. Folding immediately is good for many reasons. The
folding process itsels in essence burnishes the paper to the foil better.
Also, from speaking with various people, we have noted it is easier to fold
the paper before the glue completly dries up. Finnaly, in some cases, the
paper is more likely to separate from the foil (the folding process cases
the paper to hug more tightly to the foil). Also, if you use the 3M
artist's adhesive (like Sebastian and I do), the stuff should be usabe
instantly. Perhaps the people who need to dry their papers first are
saturating the foil with glue? Only a thin coat is needed, which should be
applied as briskly as possible. It is also easy to see if you missed a
spot; just look for any reamining shiny spots on the foil.

Marc





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 02:39:25 -0300 (ADT)
From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Perry  & the Unicorn

Zee latter, of course.





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 02:58:06 -0300 (ADT)
From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Perry  & the Unicorn

Perry's Unicorn has galloped off to
the origami-L file archive, and will
be available for download as soon as
Maarten van Gelder (the archivist)
moves it to the appropriate directory.

The file is "unicorn.PDF" and the
archive URL is:

Origami-L Archive
rugcis.rug.nl/origami

using either your web browser or FTP.

The Adobe Acrobat Reader file viewer
for PDF files is available free from
http://www.adobe.com

Valerie_Vann@compuserve.com





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 03:01:34 -0300 (ADT)
From: mplewinska@mindspring.com (Magdalena Cano Plewinska)
Subject: Re: duplicate subscription

On Tue, 1 Jul 1997 16:39:14 -0300 (ADT), Paul & Jan Fodor
<origami@aloha.net> wrote:

>Help,   Did anyone save the message about what to do if you get the same
>messages over and over?

You shouldn't be getting the same messages in several copies. It's
never happened to me on this list. I think sometimes it can be a
problem with your ISP.

   - Magda Plewinska
     Miami, FL, USA
     email: mplewinska@mindspring.com





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 03:49:47 -0300 (ADT)
From: Jin Lin <jlche3@student.monash.edu.au>
Subject: Re: OrigamiUSA Convention

I appreciate the effort Mr Bailey made, but the following is what
showed up on my screen. Somebody mind helping me out here? An
explanation would be nice.

Jin Lin

Perry Bailey wrote:
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> --------------48744A54096
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Devin McPherson wrote:
> >
>
> >   I appreciate you attempt to send this pdf file. I'm having trouble
> > converting it with Communicator. Any suggestions on how I can get it to
> > be read by Acrobat.
> > I have already set up my helper list to include this extension but that
> > doesn't seem to make any difference.
>
> Idon't know this is first time I ever sent a pdf file, I can't figure
> out what happened, maybe I'll zipp it and try again. here is the same as
> zipp, after the con Some one will probably tell me what I messed up
> Perry
> --
> >From pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net
>
> ***************************************
> * Your Life is only what you make it. *
> * so make it good. :?)'               *
> ***************************************





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 04:17:40 -0300 (ADT)
From: Paul & Jan Fodor <origami@aloha.net>
Subject: Re: duplicate subscription

Magdalena Cano Plewinska wrote:
>
> On Tue, 1 Jul 1997 16:39:14 -0300 (ADT), Paul & Jan Fodor
> <origami@aloha.net> wrote:
>
> >Help,   Did anyone save the message about what to do if you get the same
> >messages over and over?
>
> You shouldn't be getting the same messages in several copies. It's
> never happened to me on this list. I think sometimes it can be a
> problem with your ISP.
>
>    - Magda Plewinska
>      Miami, FL, USA
>      email: mplewinska@mindspring.com
Magda,   Pardon my ignorance, I'm new to everything...what is "ISP"?
Aloha, Jan Fodor





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 06:20:32 -0300 (ADT)
From: HOLMES DAVID MARCUS EXC CH <david_marcus.holmes@chbs.mhs.ciba.com>
Subject: RE: Creating Origami

Hi,

>> Could somebody please let me know whether Creating Origami by J.C.Nolan has
>> been reprinted. It is not listed by Amazon or Sasuga.
>>
>> If it is available, could you please let me know the new ISBN number.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Stephen Blackman

I got the reprint of "Creating Origami" from Fascinating Folds.
The publisher is Alexander Blace & Company and the ISBN is
1 88985 6C2 9

Dave

>--
>David M Foulds       | Novartis, Inc. Views expressed are my own
>dmfoulds@bigfoot.com `------------------------------------------
>Dave's Origami - http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/2162/
>Other Stuff    - http://www.fortunecity.com/tattooine/clarke/25/
>
>Please note my change of surname and email address, current name
>in header fields notwithstanding.





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 09:20:27 -0300 (ADT)
From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@dorsai.org>
Subject: Re: duplicate subscription

> Magda,   Pardon my ignorance, I'm new to everything...what is "ISP"?
> Aloha, Jan Fodor
>
Internet Service Provider :-)
ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org
sheldon_ackerman@fc1.nycenet.edu
http://www.dorsai.org/~ackerman





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 09:20:48 -0300 (ADT)
From: Pam and/or Namir <pgraben@umich.edu>
Subject: Viva Origami Q

So I just got my latest catalog of origami books from Sasuga!
In it, they have a book called Viva Origami Series #5:Origami Yumentai.
Critical info:
Kasahara, Kunihiko [Sanrio] hardcover 1992 176 pp. isbn 4-387-92011-4
$48.00, in Japanese.  It says models by Kasahara (but not Jun), and
rellies heavily on text with it's complex models.

I was about to get all excited, but had some questions:

I was under the impression the the Viva Origami with Jun's demon on the
cover has ceased publication.  Is this true?

Is this that book, or is it new?

If it is new, has anyone gotten it and would care to comment on it?

Thanks...Namir

!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-!-
Pamela Graben:     Thinking... what a concept!
Namir Gharaibeh:  "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."
pgraben@umich.edu





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 09:21:09 -0300 (ADT)
From: Kevin Kinney <kkinney@mail.carolinas.org>
Subject: Re: Are complex models sculpturesque?

Marc K's post:

>account of it's complexity. Could  you imagine a paintins so realistic, it
>would be thought to be a photograph? While the pure aesthictic merits would

Actually, yes.  Robert Bateman's wildlife art is on the order of that
realistic.  It took some convincing the first time I saw his work to
believe that they were paintings...

>I do not want to get into the aesthetics of the structure, as that is a
>separate (and more subjective) issue. Of course, with enough public
>awareness, the layman will eventually be able to  recognize the most
>complex works a s being origami. As formyself, I often find I have to
>convince people that my works are from single sheet of paper. Most of them
>seem to trust me, so I rarely had to unfold a model to show them the truth.
>It would be nicer if it could be more easily seen as origami. Any
>additional thoughts on this?

Well, I originally started in origami because I couldn't believe some of
the things I saw were single-square-no-cuts (The Montroll Lobster was the
one that set me over the edge, I think), so you can always offer to teach
it to them!  Or fold one in front of them, if the have a spare couple hours.

Seriously, I've med incredulity, but never outright disbelief, with some of
my foldings (others' designs).  People seem to believe me after a couple
repeats.  But then, I've not quite got to the "super-complex" stage, just
the pretty complex stage.  I do think I might unfold one to prove it, but
only as a last resort.

Kevin

Kevin Kinney
kkinney@carolinas.org





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 10:08:37 -0300 (ADT)
From: rhudson@netrax.net (Hudson-Robert)
Subject: Convention 97

Hi all--

Convention 97 was my favorite one, yet.--  I'll be posting more about it
when I get my notes together and get my photographs back.  I'm planning a
major overhaul of my web page with photos, etc.  I promise to leave it in a
more finished state than teh "Convention 97 preparation page" (really, Doug!)

Rob





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 14:18:41 -0300 (ADT)
From: Devin McPherson <devmc@oeonline.com>
Subject: Hail the sculpturesque

Marc Kirschenbaum wrote:

>  ...Could  you imagine a painting so realistic, it would be thought to
> be a photograph?...

Actually that is attempted often. I used to be a magician and when I did
shows I want people to see the magic not the mechanism that made the
illusion.If people forget that they are looking at a single piece of
paper and see the "lion" then you've accomplished what I think is the
true goal.

> ...While the pure aesthetic merits would still be intact, the viewer
> might not be able to appreciate the incredible technique that is
> involved to produce such a work...

Do you mean to play to the level of your audience? You'll be appealing
to the lowest common denominator. Do your finest work and let it raise
the level of those who can perceive it.

> ...As for myself, I often find I have to convince people that my works
> are from single sheets of paper. Most of them seem to trust me, so I
> rarely had to unfold a model to show them the truth.

If I had to unfold my model for every pinhead that couldn't recognize a
folded piece of paper I wouldn't have any origami left. If people want
to critique your work, fine; but if they want to dissect it send them on
their way.

--
-=[Devin]=-

http://oeonline.com/~devmc/origami.html

*******************************************
 It has been said that a million monkeys
 on a million keyboards could type the
 complete works of William Shakespeare.
 Thanks to AOL, we know that's not true.





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 14:21:14 -0300 (ADT)
From: Devin McPherson <devmc@oeonline.com>
Subject: duplicate subscription possible solution

Sheldon Ackerman wrote:

You may not have set your e-mail program to delete the files from the
server after they are downloaded. This will make your program download
all the stuff you left behind and the new stuff every time you log in.
You should find the option in you preferences menu.
--
-=[Devin]=-

http://oeonline.com/~devmc/origami.html

*******************************************
 It has been said that a million monkeys
 on a million keyboards could type the
 complete works of William Shakespeare.
 Thanks to AOL, we know that's not true.





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 14:22:52 -0300 (ADT)
From: Devin McPherson <devmc@oeonline.com>
Subject: Re: Perry  & the Unicorn

Valerie Vann wrote:

> Origami-L Archive
> rugcis.rug.nl/origami
>

Could you correct this please? It doesn't link to anything.

--
-=[Devin]=-

http://oeonline.com/~devmc/origami.html

*******************************************
 It has been said that a million monkeys
 on a million keyboards could type the
 complete works of William Shakespeare.
 Thanks to AOL, we know thats not true.





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 14:24:31 -0300 (ADT)
From: Teik Seong <tkteik@mbox2.singnet.com.sg>
Subject: Kawahata's Dinosaurs.

Hello Everyone,

        I read somewhere that Kawahata had a T-rex with teeth? Is that model
     found in the book "Dinosaur
Origami"? And are the models from the book made from one piece of paper? Thanks!

Regards,
Teik.





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 14:26:10 -0300 (ADT)
From: John Marcolina <jmarcoli@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Foil backing (was RE: Paper for Rose)

At 02:10 AM 7/2/97 -0300, Marc wrote:
>At 05:12 PM 7/1/97 -0300, John Marcolina <jmarcoli@cisco.com> wrote:
(blah blah snip)
>I found the above statements to be rather odd. I never give my foil backed
>papers any drying time. Folding immediately is good for many reasons.
(snip)

I realize that you don't *have* to let the adhesive dry. The reason that I
do is that I don't like breathing the vapors of the glue, which are pretty
nasty, and which subside if you let the paper sit for awhile.

John Marcolina
San Jose, CA.
jmarcoli@cisco.com





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 14:28:29 -0300 (ADT)
From: pat slider <slider@stonecutter.com>
Subject: "Japanese writing tutor"

I found this online tutor entertaining:

http://members.aol.com/writejapan/index.htm

katakana, hiragana, and kanji.....

pat slider
slider@stonecutter.com





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 14:30:13 -0300 (ADT)
From: pat slider <slider@stonecutter.com>
Subject: "Origami:Living Nature"

Does anyone have more details on the new Yoshizawa title that OUSA
is listing. Review? ISBN? Publisher?

pat slider
slider@stonecutter.com





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 14:32:00 -0300 (ADT)
From: Maldon7929@aol.com
Subject: Re: Creating Origami

Stephen,
ISBN # 1-889856-C2-9
I purchased mine through Fascinating Folds. It might be on backorder.
MW





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 23:14:47 -0300 (ADT)
From: Contractors Exchange <contract@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: Kawahata's Dinosaurs.

At 02:24 PM 7/2/97 -0300, <tkteik@mbox2.singnet.com.sg> wrote:
>       I read somewhere that Kawahata had a T-rex with teeth? Is that model
found in the book "Dinosaur
>Origami"? And are the models from the book made from one piece of paper?
Thanks!

Kawahata's complex dinosaurs are found in "Origami Fantasy." All models are
from single squares.

Marc





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 23:18:26 -0300 (ADT)
From: Nick Robinson <nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Are complex models sculpturesque?

Marc Kirschenbaum <marckrsh@pipeline.com> sez

>I often find I have to
>convince people that my works are from single sheet of paper.

Why is it so important that people recognise that? There is the "buzz"
factor as people express their admiration at the skill required, but
it's a kind of origami snobbishness - if it looks brilliant from one
sheet, all well & good. If it looks *identical* from two sheets, lose
some Brownie points.

I have yet to explore multi-piece origami, but it's all down to where
the creator draws their line. We should perhaps assess them for what
they are rather than what we'd like them to be. Yoshizawa's 2 piece
squirrels are unmatched in their animation. Curiously enough, AY once
had a go at Brill's 1 piece "man on a horse", saying that in nature man
and horse are separate, therefore 2 pieces should be used. It's a shame
Dave didn't ask how many two piece squirrels AY knew about....

>It would be nicer if it could be more easily seen as origami.

general theorem  =paper=folded=origami

What me worry?

all the best,

Nick Robinson

personal email  nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - all new look!
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/
RPM homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk - now with real Audio clips!





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 23:20:49 -0300 (ADT)
From: skirsch@t-online.de (Sebastian Marius Kirsch)
Subject: Re: Are complex models sculpturesque?

On Tue, 1 Jul 1997 JacAlArt@aol.com wrote:
> Was it folded without cutting, ripping, or tearing?

And what if it is intended to be folded without ripping, but you could
not avoid that? :-)

Yours, Sebastian               sebastian_kirsch@kl.maus.de,skirsch@t-online.de





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 23:22:35 -0300 (ADT)
From: skirsch@t-online.de (Sebastian Marius Kirsch)
Subject: Re: Kawahata's Dinosaurs.

Hi Teik!

On Wed, 2 Jul 1997, Teik Seong wrote:
>       I read somewhere that Kawahata had a T-rex with teeth? Is that model
> found in the book "Dinosaur Origami"? And are the models from the book made
> from one piece of paper? Thanks!

I don't know the book "Dinosaur Origami", but if you are referring to "Origami
Fantasy" instead, yes, the T-Rex is in this book, together with a lot of other
really stunning dinosaurs. (Including an Ankylosaurus, with which I very
nearly broke my fingers on sunday, trying to make it from a 40x40cm sheet of
tissue foil. In the end, it all worked out, though.)

"Origami Fantasy" is one of the books on my would-love-to-have-that-but-too-
expensive-or/and-out-of-print-list. (Other members of this list are "La Era
Nueva" by Kasahara and "Brilliant Origami" by Dave Brill. :-/)

Yours, Sebastian               sebastian_kirsch@kl.maus.de,skirsch@t-online.de





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 23:24:46 -0300 (ADT)
From: Dennis Brannon <brannon@jamin.enet.dec.com>
Subject: RE: Foil backing (was RE: Paper for Rose)

>Also, if you use the 3M
>artist's adhesive (like Sebastian and I do), the stuff should be usabe
>instantly. Perhaps the people who need to dry their papers first are
>saturating the foil with glue?
I use a light coat of glue, but the glue I'm using is Automotive spray glue
     from Wal Mart.
It must take longer to dry than the 3M artist's adhesive you're using.
If I tried folding with the tissue foil right away, the model would glue itself
     together
along with bits of my skin for texture.  And I'd have to fold in a well
     ventilated area.

Anybody know where I can find 3M artist's adhesive in Eastern Massachusetts USA?

dennis
brannon@jamin.enet.dec.com
Ayer, Massachusetts USA





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 23:26:43 -0300 (ADT)
From: reeds@openix.com (Reeds family)
Subject: Re: Convention 97--business card models

>Hi all--
>
>Convention 97 was my favorite one, yet.--  I'll be posting more about it
>when I get my notes together and get my photographs back.  I'm planning a
>major overhaul of my web page with photos, etc.  I promise to leave it in a
>more finished state than teh "Convention 97 preparation page" (really, Doug!)
>
>Rob

And, for me, a special highlight of the Convention was the unscheduled
business card-fold class that Rob ran at the last minute Sunday afternoon,
illustrated with beautiful models sent by Valerie Vann, and supplied with
cards by Jeannine Moseley. I also learned that Vernon Isaacs was the folder
of the lovely model --I don't know the names of these geometric solids--
that I spotted earlier this year by the cashier's desk at the restaurant at
the American Museum of Natural History.   Thank you all very much!
Karen
reeds@openix.com





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 23:31:37 -0300 (ADT)
From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Perry  & the Unicorn

Depends on whether you're using the web or FTP;
just construct the URL using the appropriate
prefix, e.g.

ftp://rugcis.rug.nl/origami/index.htm

for the web, using ftp protocol instead of http.

Or, if you're using an FTP service, the server is:

ftp.rugcis.rug.nl   with directory=origami

Or ftp.rug.nl probably works too for ftp.

Knowing how to put a URL together will often get
you where you want to go even if you've got a bum
URL or even just an email address.

However when I checked just now, the file hasn't
been moved to its final directory yet, and the
incoming directory no longer allows downloads, so
you'll have to wait until the file is "accepted".

--valerie





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 23:34:54 -0300 (ADT)
From: Morpha <morpha@columbia-pacific.interrain.org>
Subject: Paper: mulberry and others

A good source for interesting paper, mulberry and otherwise, is your local
art supply store.  Art supply stores often sell large sheets of many kinds
of handmade and machine made paper that is suitable for origami.  Many
colors, thicknesses, and textures are available.  University and college
bookstores are also good sources for art paper.  The University of
Washington bookstore sells a large variety of art papers, origami papers,
and origami books.  As a bonus, some of the cashieers on the lower level
entertain themselves at slow times by folding origami models.  I have also
found packages of tissue paper for art purposes sold there.  20 sheets for
about $2.00, each sheet a different color (even moose-colored!).  Sheets of
tissue paper are also sold sepaprately so you can pick and choose your own
color scheme.  I have found the UW bookstore to be very origami-friendly.

Last week, I discovered that the colorful labels on fireworks are great for
folding.  I have used the labels that are glued to the red tissue-like
paper that wraps strings of firecrackers, etc.  I have also carefully
removed the paper from individual fireworks.  This paper is thin, strong,
and takes a crease well.

In some states in the US, fireworks are available year round on Indian
reservations.  I have asked the proprietor at a stand in Tokeland,
Washington to save me labels and in return, have promised to send him some
origami models made from that paper.

Has anyone else used labels from fireworks?  I'd be interested in hearing
form you.

happy folding!

Morpha
Astoria, Oregon
morpha@columbia-pacific.interrain.org





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 23:37:30 -0300 (ADT)
From: Zachary Brown <zbrown@lynx.dac.neu.edu>
Subject: Re: Are complex models sculpturesque?

Marc said

> I do not want to get into the aesthetics of the structure, as that is a
> separate (and more subjective) issue. Of course, with enough public
> awareness, the layman will eventually be able to  recognize the most
> complex works a s being origami. As formyself, I often find I have to
> convince people that my works are from single sheet of paper. Most of them
> seem to trust me, so I rarely had to unfold a model to show them the truth.
> It would be nicer if it could be more easily seen as origami. Any
> additional thoughts on this?

The way I recognize something as origami is by its resemblance to
traditional models. In other words, there are certain shapes and
structures that tip me off (I am not talking about only traditional
origami being real origami, for those who might be confused).

With more complicated origami, it becomes possible to precisely control
the shapes and structures that appear, for instance Issei's horse seems
to have had its appearance entirely designed without thought to folds.

Since this is the case, it is quite possible that some origami will not
look "like" origami, even to masters!

There is nothing inherent in the nessessary appearance of origami, to
indicate that it is origami. I think people will always have to be told if
something is origami or not. It would be interesting to see a branch of
origami in which the inventors tried to make their inventions "look"  like
origami. How would they go about that? What details would they use?  I
could see a situation in which it was highly esteemed to be able to create
something that unmistakably resembled origami, while people who saw it
would have a very hard time explaining just precisely *why* it resembled
origami. Sort of like a painting where you know it's of a bowl of fruit,
but if you examine it closely, you can't find any actual evidence that it
is of a bowl of fruit.

---

But I'd like to clarify something I said earlier, since I think various
people may have misunderstood me: When I say that I prefer simplicity to
complexity, I am most emphatically *NOT* saying that I prefer simple
*subjects*. No. My whole point is that these complex models could be
created using much simpler, more economical means. I'm not advocating
folding only traditional models, and leaving new subjects alone. I'm very
much in favor of zebras and stegosauruses and insects and so on. I just
can't help feeling that the means used to create those models are overly
complex. Take Issei's horse, for example. If that is not the most complex
model I have ever folded, it is sure up in the ranks. And yet it is a
four legged animal like many others. It just seems obvious that such
tremendous complexity was not necessary to create that horse, even with
the ornamental surface details.

The reason for this complexity, I think, is because of the discovery of
certain basic ways of creating and dividing flaps. Engel is a perfect
example of an inventor who has developed a codifiable method of origami
invention, that can triumph over virtually any subject (And I owe Engel a
great debt. I am not trashing him). But the cost of this method is that it
is impartial. You want three flaps? Here is how to get them. The
conceptualization of the subject becomes a division into discrete parts
that can be treated separately, and thus, more easily.  Problems lose
their individuality because of this very flexible method that relies on
increasing complexity to deal with anything that comes up. While actually,
if solutions were found for each problem individually, without regard to
how that solution might work in other circumstances, much simpler ways
could be found.

For example, in one of Yoshizawa's books there is a sea turtle made from
a waterbomb base in about 6 steps. In another book I have, the
identically appearing turtle takes over 40 steps. The only difference
between them is that the complex version has color changed legs, which
would be easy to accomplish on Yoshizawa's model with a few minutes of
thought and basically no added complexity.

I'm not going to go on a tirade about Yoshizawa. It's simply an
illustration that the level of complexity existing now in the origami
world is about 100 times greater than it needs to be in order to
accomplish the designs it attempts.

Zack





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 23:41:07 -0300 (ADT)
From: Zachary Brown <zbrown@lynx.dac.neu.edu>
Subject: Re: RFD rec.arts.origami

I haven't seen this here, but the whole Request For Discussion is in
alt.arts.origami, and the discussion is in news.groups

I hope to see you there.

Zack





Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 23:43:21 -0300 (ADT)
From: Dino Andreozzi <andreozzi.a@botkyrka.mail.telia.com>
Subject: Apologize

Hi folders,
I want to apologize for all the problems I created with my wrong URLs. I
am really ashamed for that but I was just trying to share some origami
works with all of you. Noboby is perfect!

Happy folding
Dino

Origami home page: http://hem.passagen.se/dion





Date: Thu, 03 Jul 1997 00:08:38 -0300 (ADT)
From: Amy Huang <ahuang@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca>
Subject: Printing .pdf files (particularly larger ones)

Hi there!

        I downloaded some .pdf files the other day and tried to get them to
print but I have met this with little success. Each time I tried to print
right when the file loaded up, the printer didn't have enough memory to do
so. I've also tried saving the files and printing them *one* page at a time,
but this has been relatively unsuccessful as well. I currently have a HP
LaserJet 4L hooked up to my computer and when I tried to print the rose (for
eg) I ended up with half a page printed and the printer warning signal
flashing.

        Does anyone else have this same problem and know how to resolve it?
Any input would be greatly appreciated.

        Thanks,
        Amy

            \\~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~//
            ||                                              ||
            ||    ------     Amy Huang                      ||
            ||   ||||||||    ahuang@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca     ||
            ||   ||||||||    http://www.ualberta.ca/~ahuang ||
            ||  /        \                                  ||
            ||  |   _    |   Faculty of Pharmacy            ||
            ||  |  |_)   |   University of Alberta          ||
            ||  |  | \   |   Edmonton, Alberta, Canada      ||





Date: Thu, 03 Jul 1997 00:11:36 -0300 (ADT)
From: Perry Bailey <pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net>
Subject: Re: OrigamiUSA Convention

Jin Lin wrote:
>
> I appreciate the effort Mr Bailey made, but the following is what
> showed up on my screen. Somebody mind helping me out here? An
> explanation would be nice.

Simple, I messed up.  You can't send attachments through the list serv.
Valerie Vann is putting the file in the archives.  You can get it there.
Again I apologize for setting off this whole chain of events.
Perry
--
>From pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net

***************************************
* Your Life is only what you make it. *
* so make it good. :?)'               *





Date: Thu, 03 Jul 1997 00:14:11 -0300 (ADT)
From: Kimberly Crane <kcrane@kimscrane.com>
Subject: Possible Loss of Messages

My Internet Service Provider has been down for the last day and half.
Any messages sent to Kim's Crane have been lost.  Those of you who have
sent messages in the last two days, please re-send.

Sincerely,
Kimberly Crane
kcrane@kimscrane.com
