




From: Michael Gibson <mig@ISD.CANBERRA.EDU.AU>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 18:40:22 +1000
Subject: Re: Do I get Origami?

No, you don't get it. I can only applaude those who have responded to your
message with words of advice and encouragement, and if I saw your message
as a genuine cry for help I would be inclined to do the same.

I can only describe the tone of your message (without using harsher words)
as petulant. You had a couple of goes at writing to the list, you didn't
get the kind of response you desired, so you try the "Woe is me" approach
to attract attention (Yes I know I am buying into this, but what the
hey!).

IMHO, you still seem to be trying to impress people with your messages,
similar to what you confess to be doing with origami. You
(generally speaking) practise origami because it calls to something inside
you, because you you marvel at the beauty of its simplicity and
complexity, and because although it can be frustrating and time-consuming
you keep going back again, and again, and again....

It is selfish to think that eveyone should share the same values as you
(people would be boring if this were so), but at the same time it is nice
to know that you are not alone. For me, this list is a constant reminder
that I stand among many (though not equally) who share my love for this
art.

So no, I don't think you get it. To generalise simplistic models as "lame"
tells me this, and your blatant attempt at attention-seeking tells me
this.

I understand that I am trying to measure you with my own yardstick.
Normally I am reticent at voicing my opinion on this list, prefering to
listen and learn. I am quite prepared to receive your "flaming" (is that
what its called?). I can take the heat :) Thank you for your time, and I
will now return to obscurity.

regards,
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Michael Janssen-Gibson                 e-mail: mig@isd.canberra.edu.au





From: Frommars@AOL.COM
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 20:58:43 -0400 (
Subject: origami for enthusiast

does anyone have the origami for the enthusiast book that they could send me
some of the diagrams, possibly?





From: Rachel Katz <mandrk@PB.NET>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:52:53 +0000
Subject: Convention fever
Priority: normal

I just spoke to people at OUSA who are preparing for the convention.
They're still there quite late in the evening. Things are really humming there
but they sure could use extra hands in the next few days. If you are around New
York City and feel like helping, why not give a call and volunteer some time?

Rachel Katz
Origami - it's not just for squares!





From: Mathias Maul <maulm001@GOOFY.ZDV.UNI-MAINZ.DE>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:11:44 +0200
Subject: Re: Freising Bash

Nick Robinson wrote:

> Too tired for a long report (Matt "it looks good but flies badly" Maul &
> David Lister will doubtless write one!)

The experience seems to have impressed you so much that you are
confusing me with Sebastian Kirsch. <g>

re-entering lurk mode,
Matt "never been to any major convention" Maul.

--
Student of linguistics, English philology, computer science, comparative
ambiguity and a bit of Japanese at Mainz, Germany. Keywords: Origami,
INFOCOM, Stuttering, Lewis Carroll, Douglas Adams, James Joyce, Peter
Greenaway, Paul Simon, Michael Nyman, Atari, Apple, Monty Python.





From: Chinh Nguyen <chinhsta@GWIS2.CIRC.GWU.EDU>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 00:16:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Sellers' point of view

On Thu, 18 Jun 1998, Thomas C Hull wrote:

> (2) That the translator for Engel's interview with Yoshizawa
> misinterpreted him.  How easy would it have been for Yoshizawa
> to have actually said, "My work has inspired most origami
> creators,"  (which is true) and for it to be translated
> as "they all copy me"?  I find this very likely indeed,
> especially after having tried to break the Japanese-English
> language barrier myself on several occassions and seen how
> easy it can be to misunderstand things.

I'm not discounting that.  On the other hand... does Yoshizawa have any
respect for Western folders?  Perhaps, perhaps not.  You are a creator,
Mr. Hull.  You undoubtedly have a few Langs, Montrolls, Kawahatas,
Yoshizawas, etc., etc., laying about your house.  You respect their works
and you like to make them yourself.

On the other hand, how many Lang, Montroll, Cerceda, Crawfords, etc.,
etc., do you think Yoshizawa has laying about his house.





From: Perry Bailey <pbailey@MTAYR.HEARTLAND.NET>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 02:48:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Apology (RE:RE:Do I get Origami)

Weirdly enough, there are some fairly simple models in Ogoku Origami, by Tomoko
     fuse, in particular she has an elephant that is an action model and very
     easy to fold, not every thing in the book is easy, but they are charming
     and a good number are easy to

Perry

Paper, scissors, stone.....
Origami, Kirigami, bludgeon....
pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net
http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/
-----Original Message-----
Date: Friday, June 19, 1998 12:46 AM

>The tone of my letter was very childish and petulant.  You are correct.
>It was very late and I was tired, but that is no excuse.  I shouldn't
>generalize about the easier models being lame.  Making assumptions is an
>ignorant mistake.  By categorizing simple models as being lame I have
>become the monster that I hate.  Now I see that I am just as ignorant as
>the girl who didn't understand the rose.  Perhaps I truly don't get
>origami.  I am going to keep trying at it, and see if I truly get it.  I
>find it very enchanting (despite it being somewhat frustrating).  As
>Joseph Wu said I have to learn to walk before I learn how to run.  As
>for the attention grabber at the end, about no one answering my
>questions, that was true.  Before I asked several questions about
>several things, but few if no one responded.  On the other hand, do I
>really deserve a response when I ignore most of the messages?  I could
>be more helpful.  For now I just ask if anyone can tell me where to find
>enchanting yet simple models?
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





From: Jane Rosemarin <jfrmpls@SPACESTAR.NET>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 04:05:21 +0100
Subject: Re: Apology (Was-Do I get Origami)

> For now I just ask if anyone can tell me where to find
>enchanting yet simple models?

Thanks for your generous apology. Indeed, I did find many of your early
postings brash and bordering on offensive, and therefore difficult to
reply to, although I answered one or two.

An extraordinary model that uses only valley folds is the seashell on p.
54  of Spirals by Tomoko Fuse. Also check page 34 for a more detailed
explanation of how to fold the spiral. This is one of the most beautiful
models I have seen, and I made many before it occured to me how simple it
really was.

Fuse's Newest Kusudama has many straightforward modules, although a
certain amount of jumping around the book is necessary to find the units
you want to combine to make your kusudama ball. Someone I know, who once
dissolved into tears and threw a John Montrol model that was being
taught, swore she would in the future make nothing but kusudamas.

I love Gay Merrill Gross's work. Her current book is Paper Creations. It
is a compilation of models from The Art of Origami and Origami: Creative
Ideas for Paperfolding. My only gripe about the new book is that it omits
one of my favorite models from Creative Ideas, an envelope by Frances
LaVangia.

Origami Omnibus by Kunihiko Kasahara may also interest you when it is
republished in the fall.

If you're still folding?

Good luck.

-Jane





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 06:48:01 +0200
Subject: Re: help (SINK)

At 09:54 PM 6/17/98 -0400, you wrote:

>[...]
>When it tells you to "sink" a part of the model. Any sugestions
>for an easy way?  I find myself unfolding what I have done so
>far and then get frustrated. :(

Well, I won't go into describing it now in text but if you can receive
gif-files, I can send an extract (about "sink") from my book's symbols
section. Tell me if you are interested in these diagrams.

Peter Budai

peterbud@mail.datatrans.hu





From: Sebastian Marius Kirsch <skirsch@T-ONLINE.DE>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 06:56:17 +0200
Subject: Re: Freising Bash

On Thu, 18 Jun 1998, Mathias Maul wrote:
> Nick Robinson wrote:
> > Too tired for a long report (Matt "it looks good but flies badly" Maul &
> > David Lister will doubtless write one!)
> The experience seems to have impressed you so much that you are
> confusing me with Sebastian Kirsch. <g>

Nononono! "It looks good but flies badly" refers, I think, to Torsten
Drees -- and the one who will write a convention report is Matthias
Gutfeldt. Gee, Nick, is there still hope for you?

Yours, Sebastian                                       skirsch@t-online.de
                        /or/ sebastian_kirsch@kl.maus.de (no mail > 16KB!)





From: Martin Gibbs <mrg63@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:04:08 -0700 (
Subject: Re: Please help me identify an author/designer...

Isn't Electra by Dave Mitchell, the BOM editor. He's on this list, I
think, so he should be able to tell you about it. I don't know about the
book though.

>Anyway, there's one model in the book. The only serious modular
>construction (there are two other modulars, but they are trivial two
>piece abstract ornaments) is called "Electra". It's made of thirty
>identical units which are basically triangular in shape. The points of
>the units lock inside pockets in the units next to them to form open
>pentagons and triangles. Over-all, the shape is an open ball.
>
>While on vacation, I made this "Electra" out of two inch squares and
>I've hung it in my office. I've had some people comment on it, and I'd
>like to credit the designer, but I have no idea who that would be. Does
>anyone have any ideas?
>
>Thanks in advance.
>
>Fold in Peace,
>Tom
>tomh@groupworks.com
>

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





From: Martin Gibbs <mrg63@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:15:48 -0700 (
Subject: The Southeastern Origami Festival

The other day I received a leaflet from America about the Southeastern
Origami Festival. I just wondered who sent it. I guess it must be
someone on the list. If it is, please send me a message. I can't make it
I'm afraid as travel to America (from England) isn't exactly within my
budget at the moment. Still it was nice to hear about it. The full-size
origami skeletons of a T-rex and a triceratops (I think) sound
wonderful. Perhaps the people who are going to make it (or have made it
already) could tell us about it, unless it's already been discussed
before I rejoined the list.

Martin Gibbs.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:22:12 +0100
Subject: Re: Freising Bash

Mathias Maul <maulm001@GOOFY.ZDV.UNI-MAINZ.DE> sez

>The experience seems to have impressed you so much that you are
>confusing me with Sebastian Kirsch. <g>

No, he seemed young & bright ;)

all the best,

Nick Robinson

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 RealAudio clips!





From: V'Ann Cornelius <vann@LHT.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:39:23 -0700
Subject: Amazing step-by-step Book

Paulo Mulatinho published a book in Germany, 1993
called origami 30 Fold-by-Fold Projects. [Pfiffiges Origami]

In 1995, it was issued in English in England, Spain and
new Jersey.

the projects include:
        envelop
        T. Yenn         Cross Pleat
        G. Alvarez      Nose and Mustache
        H. Huzita       Paperholder
        F. Ow           Double Hearts
        P. Mulatinho    Cup

        etc.

The sections are
        Simple and Amazing Models
        Origami Zoo
        For a Desk Top
        Presenting gifts
        Christmas Decorations
        Geometric Figures

Is this the book?
V'Ann





From: DonnaJowal@AOL.COM
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:47:47 -0400 (
Subject: Fuso Origami

Ron Koh (Singapore) asked me if anyone could shed light on Kawahata's new book
Fuso Origami.  As it has the T-rex on the cover, and the T-Rex is in Origami
Fantasy (named because I have the fantasy that one day I'll make one) Ron
thought it might be the same book in a different edition.  If anyone has
information, please let me know and I'll pass the information on to Ron.

Donna Walcavage





From: Tom Hill <tomh@GROUPWORKS.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:47:48 -0500
Subject: Please help me identify an author/designer...
Hi all,

A while back, I was browsing a bookstore, and found in a clearance pile,
a book titled "20 Origami Designs -- Amazing step - by - step origami
projects". It says that it was published by "Smithmark Publishers" and
that it's copyright is "1996 Anness Publishing Limited". It's ISBN is
0-7651-9770-7. But, no-where in the book, does it mention an author, or
a designer for any of it's models.

The book is written in a very impersonal style. The prose is all full of
things like "This design is easy to make..." and "The design is
straight-forward..." But nothing like, "This is one of my favorite
models..." or "I like this one because...". It's as if the book was
compiled by a computer or something.

Anyway, there's one model in the book. The only serious modular
construction (there are two other modulars, but they are trivial two
piece abstract ornaments) is called "Electra". It's made of thirty
identical units which are basically triangular in shape. The points of
the units lock inside pockets in the units next to them to form open
pentagons and triangles. Over-all, the shape is an open ball.

While on vacation, I made this "Electra" out of two inch squares and
I've hung it in my office. I've had some people comment on it, and I'd
like to credit the designer, but I have no idea who that would be. Does
anyone have any ideas?

Thanks in advance.

Fold in Peace,
Tom
tomh@groupworks.com





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:28:07 -0700
Subject: Re: Sellers' point of view

At 12:16 AM 98/06/19 -0400, you wrote:
>I'm not discounting that.  On the other hand... does Yoshizawa have any
>respect for Western folders?  Perhaps, perhaps not.  You are a creator,
>Mr. Hull.  You undoubtedly have a few Langs, Montrolls, Kawahatas,
>Yoshizawas, etc., etc., laying about your house.  You respect their works
>and you like to make them yourself.
>
>On the other hand, how many Lang, Montroll, Cerceda, Crawfords, etc.,
>etc., do you think Yoshizawa has laying about his house.

Point of reference: while I don't know if Yoshizawa ever folds anyone
else's designs (I highly doubt it), I *do* know that he collects other
people's designs. He asked to keep one of my "when pigs grow wings and fly"
models when I visited his house. I even had to sign it for him at his
insistence.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t:604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331   e: josephwu@ultranet.ca





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:20:13 -0400
Subject: Re: _Great_ simple models

Sebastian Marius Kirsch suggested Neale's and Hull's "Origami Plain and Simple"

> In my opinion, every paperfolder, even the most complex nut, should have this
> book in his collection. I rarely fold from it, but I often marvel at the
> simplicity and elegance of Robert Neale's designs.

Agreed!  I like the owlets, the 'Wabbit We-wised' and of course the Magic
Ring.  The chess pieces are a cool set of abstracts.  Warning to purists, the
chess pieces are modular with separate tops and bottoms.  I prefer to use the
pawn as the base for the Bishop instead of the base given, but that is a minor
complaint.

> Nick Robinson's models are
> also very elegant, but as far as I know, only few of them are published. Nick,

Several of Nick's models are on the web.  Of the one's from his self-published?
booklet, the crab is my current favorite.

> Other good books with simpler models are Gay Merril Gross's books; or try the
> two books by Steve and Megumi Biddle for a full range of models.

Good suggestions (as some others have noted too).

I also like Origami Made Easy by Kunihiko Kasahara, and for anyone who likes
geometric models,
Fuse's Unit Origami is a must have.

-D'gou

--
end
<a href="http://www.pgh.net/~dwp">Doug's Fun Page</a>





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:24:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Sellers' point of view

Chinh Nguyen wrote:
> I'm not discounting that.  On the other hand... does Yoshizawa have any
> respect for Western folders?  Perhaps, perhaps not.  You are a creator,
> Mr. Hull.  You undoubtedly have a few Langs, Montrolls, Kawahatas,
> Yoshizawas, etc., etc., laying about your house.  You respect their works
> and you like to make them yourself.

Whether or not you respect other creators is completely separate from whether
you choose to fold their models.  They are just not the same thing.

> On the other hand, how many Lang, Montroll, Cerceda, Crawfords, etc.,
> etc., do you think Yoshizawa has laying about his house.

Probably none, from all accounts he barely has the space to store his own
models and papers.  So what?  Several creators openly admit to harvesting other
creators techniques and idea (Robert Lang and others have admitted it on this
list).  Others may choose to follow their own instincts "untainted" by
influences of other designers.  Neither path (or any mixture, such as even
might make sense) has nothing to do with respect or the lack there of.

-D'gou

--
end
<a href="http://www.pgh.net/~dwp">Doug's Fun Page</a>





From: Brenda Gryfe-Becker <gryfebecker.b@PG.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:33:00 -0400
Subject: lines from a lurker

I have previously criticized electronic "chat groups", where I have seen lots of
"huggs"/"hi"/"bye" and "clever" little quips, but little real conversation.

I want to give credit to the people who have contributed to some of the more
interesting discussions lately - namely the "seller's point of view", "do I get
origami", and even "what is the largest square you can wrap".  My life is very
busy these days with daily mundane stuff (to the point that I don't even have
time to fold), and I am finding this group a wonderful stimulus for emotional,
spiritual and intellectual thinking that I find I don't otherwise do enough of.

kudos to all.

Brenda





From: Steve Woodmansee <stevew@EMPNET.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:40:27 -0700
Subject: help with SINK-ing (long)

At 09:54 PM 6/17/98 -0400, Maureen Evans wrote:
...(snip) Well I came across something that I thought would be so easy but has
turned into an act of frustration.  So I have come to the experts to ask
for an easy way to do it.  When it tells you to "sink" a part of the
model.   Any sugestions for an easy way? ..(end quote)

First, welcome Maureen!  Don't let the passion we have for some issues
(selling, Yoshizawa-san, etc.) intimidate you, we really are a great and
mutually supportive group.

Second, on the sinks, let me first commiserate - I used to find them sooooo
frustrating also, but now I love them.  Most of the more advanced books
give some helpful diagrams on sinking at the front of the book, but I
particularly recommend any of the more recent Monroll books for best
descriptions of sinking, especially understanding the difference between an
open and a closed sink.

A sink is really just folding a peak of the model downwards, like a valley
fold, but instead of leaving a flap to deal with, the sink buries the peak
inside the model.

If you are experimenting as I did, you are probably using the common
Origami paper that comes in 6" or 10" packets.  If so, I found I sometimes
have to 'weaken' the paper around the sink to get it to cooperate with the
sink operation.  Try rolling the paper in your fingers near the sink so it
will be more willing to bend.

Also, I got some excellent advice from the list quite some time ago which
suggested that I create several models up to the trouble spot.  Then you
can sacrifice a couple of them while you experiment with the sink and you
won't be so frustrated.

Finally, if analogies work for you, maybe this will help:

1.  Picture a shopping bag (paper, not plastic!)
2.  Turn it upside down, so the bottom is on top.
3.  Poke your finger in the center surface of the bag bottom (which is on
top, remember).
4.  After the center surface has descended into the interior of the bag a
short ways, remove your finger and press the bag flat.
5.  You have created a sink fold.

Of course it is more involved than that when you're working with a model in
progress, but I promise it really is that simple!

Origami:  "Stop Drop and Fold!"
Steve Woodmansee
stevew@empnet.com





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:41:37 -0400
Subject: Re: origami for enthusiast

Carlos Alberto Furuti wrote:
> Origami is sharing, yes. But sharing good will, not hard work for no
> recognition.  It looks like many people see the Internet as a commodity
> and expect every kind of resource for free (see how many ripped-off images,
> texts and clips).
>
> If that's not your case I _deeply_ apologize. The list can help you
> in unexpected ways (if you ask clearly and reasonably), but please
> don't expect such an easily available book to be pirated.

VERY well put.  Thanks!  (I completely agree with Carlos)

-D'gou
--
end
<a href="http://www.pgh.net/~dwp">Doug's Fun Page</a>





From: Steve Woodmansee <stevew@EMPNET.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:56:52 -0700
Subject: Ongoing Debates - please read

Here's a question for everyone:

I belonged to another discussion list last year for adult adoptees looking
for birth parents, which as you can imagine, often inspired passionate and
sometimes vehement debate.  The list members also frequently found
themselves re-hashing old topics because of new questions, new members,
re-worded sentiments, etc.  Sound familiar?!

So...somethine that was very effective in managing these situations without
stifling input or offending anyone, was a method of forcibly categorizing
input to these areas which required all mail posted to the list to be
identified with one of 5 (I think) pre-designated primary topics.  In our
case that might be COPYRIGHT, HELP, ADVICE, etc.  Mail submitted without
the pre-designated topics was rejected automatically.

I found this method to be fair and easy to use.  It also facilitated an
easily practicable method of filtering out topics I wasn't interested in or
didn't wish to deal with.  Would that work for us?

We have such a fine group of smart, talented, caring, determined,
interesting people here on this list, and we are all so very passionate
about our own Origamic perspectives - I truly would hate to see all the
debating end, and yet sometimes in can seem almost hostile in tone, which
is disappointing here in our (mostly) peaceful little paper community.
Categorized discussions would allow continued discussion of the sensitive
topics for those who wish to participate in that "unwinnable" war, without
intimidating those who want to be part of the lovelier (and gentler)
aspects of this list.

Is this possible?  I wouldn't want to make more work for Joseph and whoever
else helps administer this list, but if it is something that can be
implemented without a great deal of effort, is there any interest in using
such a method?

Peace to all,

Steve
"In the paper community,
flames are not welcome"





From: Allen Parry <parry@ESKIMO.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:08:40 -0700
Subject: Re: Convention fever

On Thu, 18 Jun 1998, Rachel Katz wrote:

> I just spoke to people at OUSA who are preparing for the convention.
> They're still there quite late in the evening. Things are really humming there
> but they sure could use extra hands in the next few days. If you are around
     New
> York City and feel like helping, why not give a call and volunteer some time?

Actually, I'd like to add something here.  I remember my first trip to
convention, when I didn't know anybody, it was suggested to me to
volunteer prior to the convention.  I did, and got to know all kinds of
people, and I still come early to help out.  I recommend it highly.

What you should do is call the office at (718) 769-5635.  They're located
at the American Museum of Natural History....you just tell them at the
entrance you're going down to the Origami office, and they'll let you in
free.  You should have the office called so someone can show you how to
get to the office.  Its hard to find, down in the basement.  But, again, I
strongly recommend it, especially on or before Thurday, when the bulk of
the last minute work is being done and the help is most needed.

But be prepared to work....its not a time for socializing, though there
will be plenty of that also.  Its a great way to really feel a
part of the convention.  It worked for me, and I STRONGLY recommend it!

Allen Parry
parry@eskimo.com





From: Jack Thomas Weres <jtweres@LUCENT.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:11:09 -0500
Subject: Re: LARGE MODELS
Original-From: jtweres@ans.ih.lucent.com (Jack Thomas Weres)

ria and all,,,

to create large models
i have used a 48"x48" square of "FADELESS" black paper
-- it is black on one side and white on the other, i.e. duo colored

try any local art supply store
and ask for FADELESS (R) Art Paper

-- it comes in a 48"x12' foot roll
   and you will have to cut to make your square

-- it comes in the following colors:
   white, flame, canary, orange, apple, azure, blue, pink, black and violet

-- it will cost approximately $7.50 in the Chicago US area

this would be perfect for your penguins
and also for making faces from kenneway's "folding faces"
-- just image a 2x2 foot folded image of nixon
   as well as
   castro, shakespeare, etc.

good luck finding the paper

  /-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-///plieur de papier\\\-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-\
 /=-= jack thomas weres                         jtweres@lucent.com =-=\
/=======================\\\================///=========================\
"Let Go and Let Fold"                             "One Crease At A Time"

>
>  Greetings,
>  I need help for doing a large penguin.  I have 3'x3' black craft paper off a
>  large roll from the art
>  room in school and I can get a piece of white the same size, but I would
>  like to know if there is a
>  place that has duo sided paper like origami paper that size or a method of
>  putting the large papers
>  together as smoothly as possible to create a more realistic looking penguin.
>  Could some of the more
>  experienced enthusiasts please offer their expertise on a way to do this?
>  I'd appreciate your kind
>  advice.  I have done large models of one color paper before, but this
>  project is more difficult.
>  Thanks,
>  Ria Sutter





From: Thomas C Hull <tch@ABYSS.MERRIMACK.EDU>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:13:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Sellers' point of view

Salutations, everyone!

Chinh Nguyen asked,

>>>
You are a creator,
Mr. Hull.  You undoubtedly have a few Langs, Montrolls, Kawahatas,
Yoshizawas, etc., etc., laying about your house.  You respect their works
and you like to make them yourself.
<<<

Actually, the longer I do origami, the less and less I find I
fold other people's models.  As I look now around my apartment
the only models I see that are not my creations are Herman Lau's
dollar flower & pot (which someone gave to me) and some Montroll
ghosts that are leftover from Halloween.  Hmmm, it does seem
that I fold other people's models for special occassions,
but the vast majority of models that I choose to keep around
are my own.  Does that make me an egotist?

I can't speak for Yoshizawa, but I'd guess that someone who has
been doing origami for as long as he has, and whose life *is*
origami, would probably only have time to fold and work on his
own creations.  I agree with Doug Philips - he probably doesn't
even have room for anything other than his own work.

As to whether or not Yoshizawa respects other's work, all
I can do it repeat something he said during a lecture at the
2nd International Meeting of Origami Science and Scientific
Origami (the Otsu meeting, in Dec. 1994, Japan).  Yes, he
was being translated, but it was by a professional staff
of excellent translators who specialized in science and art
translations.  Yoshizawa took the time to mention the depth and
variety of work that was on exhibition at this meeting,
singling out the geometric work of Chris Palmer and Paulo
Barreto as being amazing.  He then went on to state how
he hoped the "human" element in origami was not being
lost in the younger folders, and described at length why this
was important to origami.  His talk was thoughtful and critical,
yes, but it also clearly made tribute to the new advances
in origami.  I call that respect.

--- Tom "all he wants to do is dance" Hull
    thull@merrimack.edu





From: Carlos Alberto Furuti <furuti@AHAND.UNICAMP.BR>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:36:50 -0300
Subject: Re: origami for enthusiast

>>From: Frommars@aol.com
>>Subject:      origami for enthusiast
>>does anyone have the origami for the enthusiast book that they could send me
>>some of the diagrams, possibly?

OftE by John Montroll/Dover is widely available and *very* inexpensive,
less than US$10. If you want a model list or diagrams for deciding whether
you are going to buy the book, just ask the list members for a review.
If you're in the US and cannot buy the book try a library loan. If you
are not in the US there are several online bookstores where it's available
(we can mention a few).

However, if you expect receiving scanned or xeroxed copies, that attitude
is both unethical and unrespectful to the author. Although there are
plenty of available diagrams around the Net,
- some can be illegally distributed, violating copyright
- some are expressly available for personal use only
- the remaining are generously provided by sharing creators/diagrammers,
  and even so they may retain copyright

It's much the same with music sheets. Someone creates a piece of art and
publishes instructions. How can he/she recover publishing costs if people
abuse freedom and copy them for almost free? Costs for professional
publishing are surprisingly high. How do you provide incentive for good
authors [at least a well-known book "author" is a damn plagiarist, but I
digress] when they hardly get any profit from honestly-bought books??????

Origami is sharing, yes. But sharing good will, not hard work for no
recognition.  It looks like many people see the Internet as a commodity
and expect every kind of resource for free (see how many ripped-off images,
texts and clips).

If that's not your case I _deeply_ apologize. The list can help you
in unexpected ways (if you ask clearly and reasonably), but please
don't expect such an easily available book to be pirated.

        Sincerely,
                Carlos
        furuti@ahand.unicamp.br www.ahand.unicamp.br/~furuti





From: Jack Thomas Weres <jtweres@LUCENT.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:41:30 -0500
Subject: 12 Steps of Origami
Original-From: jtweres@ans.ih.lucent.com (Jack Thomas Weres)

welcome to PFA -- paper folders anonymous

my name is jack
and i am a paper folder

let's recite the 12 Steps

                The Twelve Steps of Origami
                ---------------------------
                                           Copyright 1996 Jack Thomas Weres

Step 1:  We admitted we were powerless over a square piece of paper
         -- that our lives had become unmanageable.

Step 2:  Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves
         could restore us to not looking at all pieces of paper
         and wondering "Hmmm, what can i make out of this?"

Step 3:  Made a decision to turn our paper over to the care of
         The Great & Grand Paper Folder In The Sky as we understood Him.

Step 4:  Made a searching and fearless inventory of our origami books
         and origami paper stock.

Step 5:  Admitted to The Great Paper Folder, to ourselves and to another
         paper folder the exact right-handedness or left-handedness nature
         of our folding.

Step 6:  Were entirely ready to have The Great Paper Folder remove all defects
         of inexact rabbit-ear folds.

Step 7:  Humbly asked Him to remove our incorrect creases.

Step 8:  Made a list of all persons we had flamed/scorned/SPAMed
         on the origami-l mailing list, and became willing
         to make amends to them all.

Step 9:  Made direct email amends to such people wherever possible,
         except when to do so would injure them or others.

Step 10: Continued to take paper inventory and when we had
         too much paper promptly folded it.

Step 11: Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact
         with The Great & Grand Paper Folder In The Sky as we understood Him,
         praying only for knowledge of what He wants us to fold
         and the diagrams to carry that out.

Step 12: Having had a spiritual awakening as the results of these Steps,
         we tried to carry the origami message to others, and to practice
         origami in all our business meetings.

  /-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-///plieur de papier\\\-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-\
 /=-= jack thomas weres                         jtweres@lucent.com =-=\
/=======================\\\================///=========================\
"Let Go and Let Fold"                             "One Crease At A Time"





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:30:13 -0700
Subject: [NO] Re: Ongoing Debates - please read

At 11:56 AM 98/06/19 -0700, you wrote:
>So...somethine that was very effective in managing these situations without
>stifling input or offending anyone, was a method of forcibly categorizing
>input to these areas which required all mail posted to the list to be
>identified with one of 5 (I think) pre-designated primary topics.  In our
>case that might be COPYRIGHT, HELP, ADVICE, etc.  Mail submitted without
>the pre-designated topics was rejected automatically.
>
>Is this possible?  I wouldn't want to make more work for Joseph and whoever
>else helps administer this list, but if it is something that can be
>implemented without a great deal of effort, is there any interest in using
>such a method?

I just read the relevant sections of the manual about setting up topics and
I am not inclined to use them. I forsee lots of confusion when they are
implemented, and periodic problems after that. In any event, I will NOT
turn them on before leaving for the OUSA convention next week.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t:604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331   e: josephwu@ultranet.ca





From: Sebastian Marius Kirsch <skirsch@T-ONLINE.DE>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:45:01 +0200
Subject: Re: Apology (RE:RE:Do I get Origami)

On Thu, 18 Jun 1998, Julian A. wrote:
> Before I asked several questions about several things, but few if no one
> responded.

Yes, and that's because your questions were too simple. Let me quote a few
of them:

---
Is the grid in the Kawasaki Rose necessary
Is there any way to make the rose accurately without using the grid and
cheating (like using another grid for reference while folding the
flower)
where do I find the magic rose cube?
any good origami book with models as good as this one?
[...]
When is the rose cube diagram going to be on the internet?
Is there any modular flowers that anyone can tell me about?
What's the best paper for flowers
[...]
I've tried variations of the Kawasaki Rose -more petals longer petal etc.
Any of you know more about its variations?
[...]
Where can I find the magic rose cube?
I thought someone was going to diagram it and post it on the internet.
---

People only answer questions if they think that they can get something out of
it themselves -- your questions were ansolutely factual, and therefore
boring. (I skipped past them almost without reading.) You only wanted to have
information, but didn't give any.

For example, if you had elaborated on your variation of the Kawasaki rose,
ie. what exactly did you do to achieve longer petals, is the folding sequence
easier/more difficult, how did you have to change the symmetry, do the
variations look better than/not so good as the original etc., and perhaps
laced it with a general view on modifying models, you would almost certainly
have got a response freom me.

The mailing list lives because of the interaction between its members. If
someone -- like you -- only asks questions without giving information himself,
he will not get an answer; after all, this neither a read-only medium nor a
self-service station. There are people here who are able to answer your
questions, but you have to prod them on the right spot to get a response.

Yours, Sebastian                                       skirsch@t-online.de
                        /or/ sebastian_kirsch@kl.maus.de (no mail > 16KB!)





From: Sebastian Marius Kirsch <skirsch@T-ONLINE.DE>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:50:24 +0200
Subject: _Great_ simple models

On Thu, 18 Jun 1998, Julian A. wrote:
> For now I just ask if anyone can tell me where to find enchanting yet
> simple models?

Try this book:

---
@Book{Neale:Plain-and-Simple,
  author =       {Robert Neale and Thomas Hull},
  title =        {Origami, Plain and Simple},
  publisher =    {St. Martin's Press},
  year =         {1994},
  note =         {ISBN 0--312--10516--9},
  address =      {175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010, USA},
  month =        {April}
}
---

In my opinion, every paperfolder, even the most complex nut, should have this
book in his collection. I rarely fold from it, but I often marvel at the
simplicity and elegance of Robert Neale's designs. Nick Robinson's models are
also very elegant, but as far as I know, only few of them are published. Nick,
can you tell us how one can get your booklet? (I could have asked in Freising,
but ... well, you know how it is.)

Other good books with simpler models are Gay Merril Gross's books; or try the
two books by Steve and Megumi Biddle for a full range of models.

Yours, Sebastian                                       skirsch@t-online.de
                        /or/ sebastian_kirsch@kl.maus.de (no mail > 16KB!)





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:17:49 -0400
Subject: Re: LARGE MODELS

Jack Thomas Weres indited:
> to create large models
> i have used a 48"x48" square of "FADELESS" black paper
> good luck finding the paper

You can also get it from Fascinating Folds at www.fascinating-folds.com, or in
the USA: 1-800-968-2418.

(Click on Artisan papers, then on Paper rolls, or use the search function for
Fadeless)

-Doug

--
end
<a href="http://www.pgh.net/~dwp">Doug's Fun Page</a>





From: Paul & Jan Fodor <origami@ALOHA.NET>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:29:26 -1000
Subject: Re: Apology (RE:RE:Do I get Origami)

Magdalena Cano Plewinska wrote:
>
> On Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:45:01 +0200, Sebastian Marius Kirsch
> <skirsch@T-ONLINE.DE> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 18 Jun 1998, Julian A. wrote:
> >> Before I asked several questions about several things, but few if no one
> >> responded.
> >
> >Yes, and that's because your questions were too simple.
>
> >The mailing list lives because of the interaction between its members. If
> >someone....only asks questions without giving information himself,
> >he will not get an answer....There are people here who are able to answer
     your
> >questions, but you have to prod them on the right spot to get a response.
>
> Let me add to Sebastian's message. Few of us are up to writing a long
> essay on any subject. Life is too short and we do other things besides
> reading and answering questions on this list. That means that when you
> ask a question on this (or any) mailing list, you need to be pretty
> specific about it. There is no simple answer to a question such as
> "what is the best paper for flowers?" It depends on the specific type
> of model, what size you want it to be, what you expect to do with it
> and probably many other things I haven't though of. To get a
> meaningful answer, you need to give us a little background on what you
> are trying to achieve, what you've already tried and what problems you
> have run into. Also, some single sentence questions can send the
> message that the questioner is *demanding* (not just asking for) an
> answer. I wouldn't go out of my way to answer a question phrased that
> way and I have found that neither would most others.
>
> I disagree a little about the statement that people only answer
> questions only if they get something in exchange. I answer a lot of
> questions in my area of expertise (genetics) on other lists. The only
> thing I get for it is "karma credit" and being forced to focus my
> thoughts into a coherent form (I guess that's something :)). I am
> happy to answer but it takes a lot of time to explain such things
> properly and I would resent anyone demanding that I do it whenever the
> question is asked rather than when I feel I can spare the time. I am
> sure others feel the same way on the subject of origami.
>
> I personally do origami because I find it relaxing to fold models I
> know well, challenging to fold new models, and just plain amazing that
> it's possible to make something that is recognizable as an animal or
> person out of a square piece of paper. I also love the way modulars
> come together to make a whole. I'm happy when other people appreciate
> my models but that is definitely not my top motivation (or even
> close). I'm sure others have their own reasons. Whatever your reason
> is, only you can decide whether it's sufficient for you.
>
> Better luck getting your questions answered in the future.
> --
> Magda Plewinska                   mplewinska@mindspring.com
> Miami, FL, USA

Maureen, would you mind if I put this on the origami list?  I would
really like to know what the creators and authors have to say.  Jan
--
<http://www.gotomymall.com/hawaii/origami/>
Origami by Jan website...the Fodor folder





From: Paul & Jan Fodor <origami@ALOHA.NET>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:32:45 -1000
Subject: (no subject)

Sorry Magda/Sebastian, I pulled up the wrong post.  Jan
--
<http://www.gotomymall.com/hawaii/origami/>
Origami by Jan website...the Fodor folder





From: Richard Kennedy <r.a.kennedy@BHAM.AC.UK>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:39:36 +0100
Subject: Re: Please help me identify an author/designer...

> a book titled "20 Origami Designs -- Amazing step - by - step origami
> projects". It says that it was published by "Smithmark Publishers" and
> that it's copyright is "1996 Anness Publishing Limited". It's ISBN is
> 0-7651-9770-7. But, no-where in the book, does it mention an author, or
> a designer for any of it's models.

> piece abstract ornaments) is called "Electra". It's made of thirty

> like to credit the designer, but I have no idea who that would be. Does
> anyone have any ideas?

Tom

I'm pretty certain that the book is (another) repackaging of fragments of
books by Paul Jackson. The 'Electra' model is by Dave Mitchell (Dave is
on the list, so he should be able to confirm this).

Richard K
(R.A.Kennedy@bham.ac.uk)





From: Marc Kirschenbaum <contract@PIPELINE.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:45:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Convention fever

At 12:08 PM 6/19/98 -0700, Allen Parry <parry@ESKIMO.COM> wrote:

>What you should do is call the office at (718) 769-5635.  They're located
>at the American Museum of Natural History....you just tell them at the
>entrance you're going down to the Origami office, and they'll let you in
>free.  You should have the office called so someone can show you how to
>get to the office.  Its hard to find, down in the basement.  But, again, I
>strongly recommend it, especially on or before Thurday, when the bulk of
>the last minute work is being done and the help is most needed.

Good tip Allen. Just a correction: the correct area code is 212.

Marc





From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 16:33:09 -0600
Subject: Origamists have it soft! (Was: Sellers' point of view)

Kim Best:  Also one might have to pay royalties even if ones model had some of
     the
same folds as someone elses model (The Verve:  Symphony of Life).

Rob Moes: These are the 90's, Kim!   Get with the program....   :)Kim Best:
Obviously, you didn't catch the significance of my above reference to the Verve.
:-P

Rob Moes: These days recording artists are willing to offer a songwriting
     credit to
someone who may have simply influenced their recording.  Most recently I recall
     the
Rolling Stones giving a credit to k.d. lang for "Anybody Seen My Baby" simply
because the refrain was so similar to her song "Constant Craving."  No cries of
rip-off, no heavy-handed arguments.  I believe k.d. mentioned in an interview
     that
she was actually flattered by the gesture.

Kim Best: It sounds like Katie Lang is a lot more understanding than the Rolling
Stones.  Because the way I heard it, and I do admit this came from a Radio DJ,
almost all the profits from The Verves song "Symphony of Life", are going to
members of the Rolling Stones, because the musical portion sounds alot like
     "This
Could be the Last Time".

But before I get too off the subject, let me explain my point in make the
     previous
analogy.  Compared to the rest of the art world, we have it pretty soft.  We
     are so
used to the open sharing environment of origami, we don't realize how protective
the rest of the world is of their intellectual property.

We have often discussed how little protection creators of origami have under the
law.  But do we really know that?  Yes, I have read the arguments for why
     specific
models can't be copyrighted.  And by logically comparing it to other art forms,
     I
would have to agree it's probably true.  But law isn't based on logic, it's
     based
on precidence.  And as far as I know, no one has sued anyone over a piece of
origami.  Hey, maybe a good lawyer could convince a jury that the folding
     sequence
of a paper bear, IS more important, from an artistic standpoint, than the
manufacturing process for a stuffed teddy bear.  But until somebody trys it, we
will probably never know.

But I just can't see it ever happening.  I can't imagine anyone wants to sue
another paper folder.  We're just to nice.  We just love getting together and
teaching each other new models. Many of us consider each other family, and who
wants to take family to court.

And that probably is a good thing. I personally wouldn't want to see more legal
controls put on origami.  But before you start complaining too much about
     someone
who may be a bit more protective of his "children", maybe you ought to stop and
reflect on how free and accessable most origami really is.

PS.  I really can't feel too sorry for The Verve.  Everytime I watch that stupid
video, and see that weasely jerk banging into people on the street, I keep
     hoping
that one of the beefier guys will beat the tar out of the rude little twerp.

--
Kim Best                            *******************************
                                    *          Origamist:         *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Some one who thinks paper   *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * thin, means thick and bulky *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************





From: Pam and/or Namir <pgraben@UMICH.EDU>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 17:12:35 -0400
Subject: Origami Sighting

So I'm tooling sown the highway in my car, listening to the radio, when to
my surprise, the word origami popped out of a song, right into my ear!  I
didn't believe it, so I vowed to catch it next time on the radio.  I
failed, but did snag the artist & song (Eve6, Inside out), and searched
that marvalous thing we call the web, and found this:
http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Shores/5446/insideout.html

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





From: David Foulds <fe320473@CR10M.STAFFS.AC.UK>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 17:37:34 +0100
Subject: Re: origami for enthusiast

On Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Carlos Alberto Furuti wrote:

> >>From: Frommars@aol.com
> >>Subject:      origami for enthusiast
> >>does anyone have the origami for the enthusiast book that they could send me
> >>some of the diagrams, possibly?
>
> OftE by John Montroll/Dover is widely available and *very* inexpensive,
> less than US$10. If you want a model list or diagrams for deciding whether
> you are going to buy the book, just ask the list members for a review.

This is a model list for this book on my Origami Bibliography page

    http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/2162/hb_montroll4.html

Dave

--
David M Foulds
dmfoulds@bigfoot.com
fe320473@stmail.staffs.ac.uk
http://www.bigfoot.com/~dmfoulds





From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 17:41:38 -0600
Subject: Re: Ongoing Debates - please read

Steve Woodmansee wrote:

> So...somethine that was very effective in managing these situations without
> stifling input or offending anyone, was a method of forcibly categorizing
> input to these areas which required all mail posted to the list to be
> identified with one of 5 (I think) pre-designated primary topics.  In our
> case that might be COPYRIGHT, HELP, ADVICE, etc.  Mail submitted without
> the pre-designated topics was rejected automatically.

oooooo....  That one makes me twinge, for two reasons.  First of all I consider
my right to come up with clever stuff in my subject line, as part of my
artistic expression.  And I don't like people telling me how to use it.

Secondly, it reminds me of a news group I used to participate in.  The spam and
ads got so bad, we had to put a keyword at the beginning of all our posts, just
to be seen!  So, guess what?  That's right many of the advertisers started
putting the keyword in their subject lines.  Anyway, it got to be such a pain
participating in the group, I finally just dropped it.  The point is, we had a
big problem, and needed a solution.  Lets not implement anything drastic, or
complicated, unless we really have to.

I do think we can, voluntarily, do more to keep our subject lines more
informative.  And when the subject changes in an ongoing thread, please lets
change the subject line.

> "In the paper community,
> flames are not welcome"

Flames?!?!  Why you stupid @$$@# morons wouldn't know a flame.  If one flew up
your $@% and knocked you into a vat of @$^%^ and made you $^%%  $#@  for the
rest of  your life!!!

Sorry! Sorry!  Please forgive me.  I hope I didn't offend anyone too much.  But
I just wanted to give some of the gentler members of the group, some idea as to
what a flame really is!  Ok, so sometimes the tone can get a little belligerent
but, compared every other group I've been in,  this is paradise.  Hey!  I heard
that!  Not all my other interests are sorted!

Anyway, I just think some of us are a bit thin skinned.  We don't have the
luxury of seeing the facial expression of the person on the other end of the
mail we are reading.  So it's easy to get the intent wrong.  We just have to
give each other the benefit of the doubt and not let things upset us.  Even if
this group didn't change and iota, I think it would be a model of civility for
just about ever other group on the net.

And please don't put my name in a mail filter, I promise I will never do it
agian.

--
Kim Best                            *******************************
                                    *          Origamist:         *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Some one who thinks paper   *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * thin, means thick and bulky *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 18:38:30 +0200
Subject: Re: Do I get Origami?

Hi All,

Sorry for my absence in the last couple of days. It was due to my trip to
Portugal (which I won at a competition). Now I'm back and trying to catch up
with the (e-)mails.

Peter Budai

Hi Julian,

>I just starting doing origami, but I am not sure I understand it or like
>it enough to keep doing it.

Even I'm not considered about why I do it but I do it. This is for me.
As for you, it's your job to find out if you like it enough or not.

>I started giving them away, trying to get people to see the beauty of
>origami-how one square of paper can transform into a 3-d shape like a rose.

Some people can't get THIS, simply because they haven't seen anything like
origami before, thus it's something unbelievable for them. And thus, they
can't fix a "value" ($) to any origami model, or if they do, it has nothing
to do with the real value of the fold. So someone may say it worth 50 cents
and another may say 50 dollars. Those who fold, they know how much their
work worth (not in $) and no one else does.

>After one terrible experience after another I wondered wether I am really
>an origami person.

Not the reaction of other people should tell you if you are an "origami
person" but you yourself should.

>I thought maye I did it to impress others.  Now I don't know if I'm
>going to keep working at it.

I make it to impress myself (it's hard). And if a model impresses others,
I'm happy. If not, no problem as far as I like that model. Again, some
people can't get the point of origami. I met opinions like "why do you fold
that all the way when you could simply CUT IT OUT" ????!!!!????!!!! (Hmmm...
Okay, then why not to draw one instead of cutting? Or better, why not to
imagine it instead of working so much?) Another opinion was "this is
children's play, nothing interesting...". I got the person who said this to
fold a very easy model. And that person didn't succeed... I think these
"opinions" have no base, so why should we take them as if they did?

>Obviously, I should have started with a book for beginners, but I
>don't like unrealistic and lame models.

I like most the realistic ones as well, but believe me, it's sure that there
are simpler realistic ones for beginners/intermediate.

>I think I might even unsubscribe to this list as I hardly ever get any
>responses to my questions.

This sounded like a kind of chantage and that's why some people got a bit
angry with you (not all). You reached that they answered, but I don't think
you're pleased with those letters telling you off. If you don't get an
answer, it's not because YOU asked it but rather because the others are busy
with work, life, etc. or simply because they can't help you. Imagine that
everyone who can't help wrote a message saying "Sorry I can't help" to the
list. That would mean a lot of useless messages per each other message.

Think it over and anyhow you decide, all the best and don't let the world
scare you!

Peter





From: Foldmaster@AOL.COM
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:22:29 -0400 (
Subject: Re: Please help me identify an author/designer...

I have a book by Tomoko Fuse which includes diagrams of "Electra" which
credits David Mitchell for creating the unit.  The modular is indeed created
from 30 pieces and when completed is a hollow ball.

This book is a paperback book (6" X 8" size) published in 1993.  ISBN
#4-405-07553-0 C8076  1300 Yen

If you need more information, please contact my privately

Yours,

June Sakamoto





From: "Katherine J. Meyer" <kathy@SILENTWORLD.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 21:59:49 -0500
Subject: 50 Ways lyrics

50 Ways to Fold Your Model

The problem is all inside your head, she said to me
Origami is easy if you take it mathematically
I'd like to help you with your creases, that's the key
There must be fifty ways to fold your model

She said we really need to work on your technique
This is a rabbit ear, right here you fold a peak
A few more folds you learn will help with what you seek
There must be fifty ways to fold your model
Fifty ways to fold your model

CHORUS:
You just get a good book and look
Go on the Web, Deb
Joseph Wu would do
Or listen to Lang
Hop on the bus, Gus
Go to a convention
Take a great class, las
It s a gas!

She said it helps to have a diagram that s clear
It makes it so much easier to follow it, my dear
I said I can believe that,
And please take away my fear
About the fifty ways

She said it's really not that hard, you will agree
It does take practice, but just wait and you will see
A finished model will fill you with such glee
There must be fifty ways to fold your model
Fifty ways to fold your model

CHORUS

Well that is my version. Chris how are you coming along with your
lyrics? Norma and Ria did you come up with a song yet? Anyone else care
to try? It's fun!!!

Kathy <*))))><
