




From: Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 16:20
Subject: printing online diagrams (was Re: Thanks for the feedback)

Dr Stephen O'Hanlon wrote:
> Secondly, I am going to re scan a lot of my diagrams and ensure that they
> will fit in both UK A4 paper and US letter paper. Most of the ones on the

The diagram size seems to be a problem for many users. Maybe I'm the
only one, but I don't have this problem. I always save diagrams and
print them out from within my graphics software. There, I can set the
print 'shrink to fit', so no matter what size the gif is, it will fit
nicely on an A4.
And for pdf files, I can also 'shrink to fit' when I print them out with
the Acrobat Reader. So again, size doesn't matter. What am I doing
wrong?

Matthias





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 16:38
Subject: Re: printing online diagrams (was Re: Thanks for the feedback)

Matthias Gutfeldt wrote:

+The diagram size seems to be a problem for many users. Maybe I'm the
+only one, but I don't have this problem. I always save diagrams and
+print them out from within my graphics software. There, I can set the
+print 'shrink to fit', so no matter what size the gif is, it will fit
+nicely on an A4.
+And for pdf files, I can also 'shrink to fit' when I print them out with
+the Acrobat Reader. So again, size doesn't matter. What am I doing
+wrong?

Try printing from your web browser.

When I'm really desperate, I can use a unix box to run 'xv' which can
convert from GIF/JPG to PostScript (scaled to fit), which I can then
feed to a local postscript printer. But its a right royal pain
capturing and moving the files from computer to computer to computer to
printer.

For reasons already well elucidated, converging on a standard paper
size isn't going to be happening soon. It seems the best thing to do is
to create graphics that will print on either of the US/Canadian and
European/Metric papers. Failure to do so is not "fatal" just
unnecessarily frustrating and annoying. I have hestitated to even
mention it, when language barriers can be even more effective in
thwarting use of diagrams than page size, but there it is.

-D'gou





From: Bernie Cosell <bernie@FANTASYFARM.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 17:17
Subject: Re: NO: WebTV & Plug-ins

On 12 Sep 99, at 11:33, Valerie Vann wrote:

> [Are web TV'ers (and other users of these cable Internet connections)
> able to print, or just look?]

Don't mix the two up: WebTV folk are second-class Internet citizens and
have to endure a LOT of infelicities.  Folks with cable-connections have
no such limitations: the cable connection basically gives you what looks
like a LAN connection to the Internet and you can do *anything* on your
side of it [yes, you can choose to get some kind of crippled box for your
TV from your cable comapny, but you can also just connect the cable modem
to an ethernet adapter in your computer and _fly_; I certainly haven't
heard of a cable system [although there probably are some] that would
*force* their customers to use a WebTV-like box...

> As for not having plug-in use capability, seems to me this would
> be a MAJOR MINUS for these internet access schemes, since PDF
> format files are rapidly rivaling MSWord format for documents on
> the web, being increasingly used by US government sites as
> well as businesses for all kinds of longer information on the Web.

Ever since WebTV first appeared the folks that chose it have had to deal
with a tradeoff.  For somewhat less expense [although with Circuit City
selling full PC systems *with*monitors* for $200, the expense is less of
an issue than it was a few years back] and for some logistic convenience
[no need for a "PC" and all the hassles and wiring and ugliness, crashes,
etc, etc that it entails], WebTV folk have been relegated to being second-
class Internet citizens from the start.  Whole hosts of web sites aren't
available to them [because either it uses some flavor of HTML that they
don't have the choice-of-browser to deal with, or because it uses some
plugin, or a java applet or whatever], *large* parts of the internet are
just off limits to them [IRC, CUSeeMe, Read Audio, FTP, Telnet, etc...
dunno if they can do "Instant Messaging" yet, but certainly they were
constrained to be nothing more than observers as ICQ was coming into its
own; I assume that WebTV folk can have personal web pages but can you put
images and audio clips on your page?  Can you use things like GeoCities
[is there some way you can "upload" a page?].  [I'm not being contentious
here, just wondering how far they've managed to 'grow' WebTV's
facilities]

Yes, the WebTV stuff has been evolving [used to be that they could *ONLY*
send HTMLized-email, for example] but it still lags the Internet as a
whole by a fair bit, and so while they're getting more capable they're
really still always going to be 'second class' as the Internet lurches
madly forward and they can't quite catch up.

   /Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--





From: Bernie Cosell <bernie@FANTASYFARM.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 17:17
Subject: Re: printing online diagrams (was Re: Thanks for the feedback)

On 12 Sep 99, at 22:18, Matthias Gutfeldt wrote:

> Dr Stephen O'Hanlon wrote:
> > Secondly, I am going to re scan a lot of my diagrams and ensure that they
> > will fit in both UK A4 paper and US letter paper. Most of the ones on the
>
> The diagram size seems to be a problem for many users. Maybe I'm the
> only one, but I don't have this problem. I always save diagrams and
> print them out from within my graphics software. There, I can set the
> print 'shrink to fit', ... What am I doing
> wrong?

Using fancy external software packages and disk space and storage so that
you can process the image locally.  The whole point of Dr O'Hanlon's
suggestion is that it be something that browsers can do natively, so that
folks don't *have* to go out and got "graphics software" nor waste disk
space to store things locally when all you want is a Internet->Printer
path.

  /Bernie\

--
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--





From: Douglas Zander <dzander@SOLARIA.SOL.NET>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 17:22
Subject: message from David Whitbeck

David asked me if I could forward this to the list.  -DZ
===========================================================================
 Hi to all!  I've been seriously running out on time lately so I've decided
 to choose actually folding origami over reading email from this list.  I
 apologize to people on the list for whom I've rubbed the wrong way and hope
 everyone on this list has a good one.  I'll resubcribe sometime in the
 future, happy folding :)

 Sincerely,

 David Whitbeck
 ps you can always reach me by emailing dmwhitbeck@ucdavis.edu

 "Recognition of the limitations, as well as the capabilities, of reason is
 far more beneficial than blind trust, which can lead to false ideologies
 and even destruction."  --Morris Kline





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 17:28
Subject: Re: Thanks for the feedback

Dr Stephen O'Hanlon indited:

+Thanks for the feedback so far,
+
+Re Mike :
+Ive got a HI/Complex tricerators and stegasaurus (improvement on the current
+one by a long way) that need to be diagrammed. I still have to diagram by X
+wing fighter model although to be honest the one on Joseph Wu's page site is
+better.

Perhaps that could be a challenge to design one that'd be even better? Or
maybe not, depends on your inclinations.

If I may venture a question/comment. I was quite pleased to see you have a
velociraptor model. When I went looking on the internet for photos/info to
compare it to (as a friend's daughter wanted one for a birthday present, not a
live one, of course ;-) ) and it seems they had rather long front legs/arms.
If you're inclinded ( or if anyone else is! ) to redesign another dino, may I
suggest that one?

+Secondly, I am going to re scan a lot of my diagrams and ensure that they
+will fit in both UK A4 paper and US letter paper.

Yay, thank you!

-D'gou





From: Bernie Cosell <bernie@FANTASYFARM.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 17:47
Subject: NO- gif vs jpg

Dr. O'Hanlon's comment about standardizing on an -image- format that
would fit on both US letter and A4 paper is an excellent one, but I'd
like to make one tiny suggestion: consider .jpg instead of .gif.  jpg
files are *MUCH* [emphasis on the 'much'!] smaller than .gif files and as
far as I know are just as universally displayable/printable/creatable [is
there a drawing system that'll only create .gif and not .jpg files?  web
browsers do both just fine; even MS Paint will read and write .jpg
files].

There is really very little advantage to using .gif format [unless you're
planning to have animated diagrams..:o)] and the size-penalty is a
nontrivial one.

  /Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--





From: Dr Stephen O'Hanlon <fishgoth@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 18:40
Subject: Re: Thanks for the feedback

D'gou wrote :

>If I may venture a question/comment. I was quite pleased to see you have a
>velociraptor model. When I went looking on the internet for photos/info to
>compare it to (as a friend's daughter wanted one for a birthday present,
>not a
>live one, of course ;-) ) and it seems they had rather long front
>legs/arms.
>If you're inclinded ( or if anyone else is! ) to redesign another dino, may
>I
>suggest that one?

I rather like to keep dinosaur models as they are, and call improvements a
different species, unless they are _much_ better. I've designed a
Deinonychus (essentially velociraptor's big brother, with a bad attitude)
which has a more 3-d structure, has a mouth, eyes, longer forearms, and
three toes, the medial (innermost) one being much larger than the others
with a sharp claw. Unfortunatly the model has an 'open' back. Never the
less, it still shapes up well. The base is similar to Montroll's Iguanadon.
I may scan/photo the model soon, but diagrams will take ages!

I feel that the diagrams on my web page for the velociraptor do need to be
redrawn - I still get a few e mails asking about the steps that form the
arms as I havent made that all that clear. However, they were the first set
of diagrams I actually drew, so I am rather fond of them still.

Have fun folding,

Stephen.

PS : I came up with a rather nifty klingon 'bird-of-prey' while on the train
from Reading to Paddington as a pressie for my girlfriend who rather likes
star trek and its clones. Essentially, its a streched bird base and almost
folds its self...another copy is now in my 'models to be diagrammed' box...

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





From: Kun Chang <kun.chang@SYMPATICO.CA>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 19:59
Subject: looking for info for Film about touch

I am currently working on a film about the sense of touch and wondered
if anyone would know something about regaining the sense of touch
through origami.

I remember reading an article some years ago about a factory that
introduced origami so that the workers who did repetitive work all day
in the factory wouldn't loose sensitivity in their fingers.

If you know anything about this or you yourself have taken up origami to

retain or regain tactility I would be very interested in hearing from
you

Yours faithfully

Kun Chang





From: Michael Janssen-Gibson <mig@ISD.CANBERRA.EDU.AU>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 22:42
Subject: case of the repeated star

Thank-you to all those who helped me track down this star, especially Amy
for her helpful pointer. Would anyone believe that in a recent bout of
insomnia I came up with the exact same unit (at about 3:30am) for a star,
differing only in the locking mechanism?

I know I can't have expected such a simple concept not to have been
repeated before (especially as I had seen a photo ;}), but the thrill of
working it out was still a good one.

regards

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Michael Janssen-Gibson                 e-mail: mig@isd.canberra.edu.au
ISD, Library                   phone/voice mail: +61 6 (06)  201 5271
University of Canberra
PO Box 1 Belconnen, ACT 2616





From: P Bailey <pbailey@OPENCOMINC.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 22:44
Subject: Re: An Origami Revolution!

Donna & Robin wrote:

> should follow mr Lang's example and not mention their names. Anybody
> interested in 'comedy frog' , 'pig in a dress' and 'seven foor tall yellow
> bird'?

You Betcha!!

Perry
--
"Each time he shifted gears he did it as if the Moment of Truth
had arrived in a bullfight"
H. Allen Smith "The Pig in the Barber Shop"

http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/           <--Website w/ diagrams!
Icq 23622644





From: P Bailey <pbailey@OPENCOMINC.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 22:53
Subject: Re: NO- gif vs jpg

Bernie Cosell wrote:
>
> Dr. O'Hanlon's comment about standardizing on an -image- format that
> would fit on both US letter and A4 paper is an excellent one, but I'd
> like to make one tiny suggestion: consider .jpg instead of .gif.  jpg
> files are *MUCH* [emphasis on the 'much'!] smaller than .gif files and as
> far as I know are just as universally displayable/printable/creatable [is
> there a drawing system that'll only create .gif and not .jpg files?  web
> browsers do both just fine; even MS Paint will read and write .jpg
> files].
>
> There is really very little advantage to using .gif format [unless you're
> planning to have animated diagrams..:o)] and the size-penalty is a
> nontrivial one.

I have to disagree on this one as jpeg save in true color where I can
shrink a true color jpeg down to half of it's size as a gif.

Perry

--
"Each time he shifted gears he did it as if the Moment of Truth
had arrived in a bullfight"
H. Allen Smith "The Pig in the Barber Shop"

http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/           <--Website w/ diagrams!
Icq 23622644





From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 23:41
Subject: Cartoon Origami

<<Why not characters?!?  From cartoons.  Or movies.

Robert Lang mentioned one reason why not in his initial post:
copyright & trademark issues. Companies like Disney are rabid
in defense of their rights; the creator of cartoon origmai
models might be able to get away with distibuting designs for
free, but had better not call them by their proper names, and
publishing the diagrams would be totally out of the question.

Valerie





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 23:43
Subject: Re: case of the repeated star

Michael Janssen-Gibson indited:

+I know I can't have expected such a simple concept not to have been
+repeated before (especially as I had seen a photo ;}), but the thrill of
+working it out was still a good one.

Indeed! That reminds of a comment by Richard Feyman that I recently
read in his Lectures on Computation: (the subject is different, but
the idea is the same, and he says it better than I)

    Then, as you go into adulthood, you develop a certain
    confidence that you can discover things; but if they've
    already been discovered, that shouldn't bother you at all.
    What one fool can do, so can another, and the fact that
    some other fool beat you to it shouldn't disturb you: you
    should get a kick out of having discovered something. Most
    of the problems I give you in this book have been worked
    over many times, and many ingenious solutions have been
    devised for them. But if you keep proving stuff that others
    have done, getting confidence, increasing the complexities
    of your solutions--for the fun of it--then one day you'll
    turn around and discover that _nobody actually did that
    one!_ And that's the way to become a computer scientist.

-D'gou





From: "Jerry D. Harris" <LOKICORP@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 1999 23:47
Subject: Cartoon Origami

Message text written by Origami List
>Companies like Disney are rabid
in defense of their rights; the creator of cartoon origmai
models might be able to get away with distibuting designs for
free, but had better not call them by their proper names, and
publishing the diagrams would be totally out of the question.<

I recall someone years ago invented an origami Batman and sent either a
model or a photo to DC Comics, who promptly threatened to sue for copyright
infringement.  Sadly, some people prefer to make money, rather than art or
creativity, more important in life...

But Dr. Lang did invent an origami Opus (the chubby little penguin from the
now-defunct "Bloom County" cartoon), which was in the '88 Annual
Collection, as I recall.  Did Berke Breathed ever receive one?  I don't
know, but very early in my own origami career, I improvised the snoot of a
penguin from Harbin's _New Adventures in Origami_ to make it more
Opus-esque, and gave it to Breathed during an autograph session for one of
his books!  He enjoyed it quite a bit...but was dismayed that it didn't
have the characteristic red bow tie.

        Ah, well...

 _,_
 ____/_\,) .. _
--____-===( _\/ \\/ \-----_---__
 /\ ' ^__/>/\____\--------
__________/__\_ ____________________________.//__.//_________

 Jerry D. Harris
 Fossil Preparation Lab
 New Mexico Museum of Natural History
 1801 Mountain Rd NW
 Albuquerque NM 87104-1375
 Phone: (505) 899-2809
 Fax: (505) 841-2866
 102354.2222@compuserve.com





From: Bernie Cosell <bernie@FANTASYFARM.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 00:24
Subject: Re: NO- gif vs jpg

On 12 Sep 99, at 21:44, P Bailey wrote:

> Bernie Cosell wrote:
> >
> > Dr. O'Hanlon's comment about standardizing on an -image- format that
> > would fit on both US letter and A4 paper is an excellent one, but I'd
> > like to make one tiny suggestion: consider .jpg instead of .gif.  jpg
> > files are *MUCH* [emphasis on the 'much'!] smaller than .gif files ...
>
> I have to disagree on this one as jpeg save in true color where I can
> shrink a true color jpeg down to half of it's size as a gif.

Hmm.. I haven't seen that effect...  Your comment piqued my curiosity on
this and so I visited "clip art" site and tried doing gif->jpg
conversions to see what happens and I have to admit that after trying a
dozen or more images without any success [that is, in every case the .jpg
was smaller than the .gif] I managed to find one: a 1028x915x4 .gif file
that is 18Kb and I converted it to a .jpg and it grew to be *82K*.  Whew!
so the .jpg _can_ be larger than the .gif... You learn something every
day.

[Sorry for this stream-of-consciousness posting, but I do some more
testing: why not test with orgami diagrams, I'm thinking.  So I did.
Jorma's double CD case is 8KB as a .gif and is 49 Kb as a .jpg..  On
Valerie VAnn's business-card page, she has a photograph that is 121Kb as
a .gif file and would only be 90Kb as a .jpg.  On Mette's diagrams of
Frances LeVangia's Envelope, the diagrams are stored as .jpg files and
the first one is 31Kb but would shrink to 14Kb if it were stored as a
.gif file.  On Gerald Hughes's letterfold page, the "bar envelope' is 21
Kb as a .gif file but becomes 51Kb as a .jpg.

So I think I can even see the pattern: if your image is something
approximating a picture, then .jpg does better, but if your image is more
like a black-and-white line drawing I am surprised to have to admit that
.gif *IS* smaller.  I don't know about really-fancy grayscaled diagrams
[it seems that those usually are done in .pdf anyway, so I couldn't
quickly find one to check].

so I guess you're right: for most origami diagrams, .gif *would* be the
best format to store it in...

  /bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--





From: Carole Young <youngcj@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 01:00
Subject: Re: looking for info for Film about touch

I do origami for several reasons, but two related to your question are:
(1) origami for 3-D imaging, it helps me imagine and "see" things in space
(2) origami for seeing through your fingers, that is, folding without
looking at the paper.  Origami is wonderful or eye-hand coordiantion, but
is a different experience without the eye.

Carole

-----Original Message-----
From:   Kun Chang [SMTP:kun.chang@SYMPATICO.CA]
Sent:   Sunday, September 12, 1999 2:52 PM
To:     ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject:        looking for info for Film about touch

I am currently working on a film about the sense of touch and wondered
if anyone would know something about regaining the sense of touch
through origami.

I remember reading an article some years ago about a factory that
introduced origami so that the workers who did repetitive work all day
in the factory wouldn't loose sensitivity in their fingers.

If you know anything about this or you yourself have taken up origami to

retain or regain tactility I would be very interested in hearing from
you

Yours faithfully

Kun Chang





From: Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 03:34
Subject: Re: NO- gif vs jpg

>===== Original Message From Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU> =====
>There is really very little advantage to using .gif format [unless you're
>planning to have animated diagrams..:o)] and the size-penalty is a
>nontrivial one.

I was under the impression that .jpg is smaller for images with many colours
and detail, whereas .gif is smaller for diagrams, which are usually mostly
white with a few black lines and some shading, at times. At least that's how
it is with my files. Of course I can compress a jpg more, but then the detail
is lost.

Matthias





From: Michael Janssen-Gibson <mig@ISD.CANBERRA.EDU.AU>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 03:38
Subject: articles on origami

Searching through a Psychology literature database recently revealed a
number of
articles on origami, one which seemed to relate to the film recently
mentioned on the list:

   TI: The use of origami in the mathematics education of visually
impaired students.
   AU: Tinsley,-Tuck
   SO: Education-of-the-Visually-Handicapped. 1972 Mar; Vol 4(1): 8-11.
   JN: Education-of-the-Visually-Handicapped;
   IS: 0013-1458
   PY: 1972

I am constantly amazed at where "origami" turns up in the current and past
literature, across all disciplines.

regards

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Michael Janssen-Gibson                 e-mail: mig@isd.canberra.edu.au
ISD, Library                   phone/voice mail: +61 6 (06)  201 5271
University of Canberra
PO Box 1 Belconnen, ACT 2616





From: DLister891@AOL.COM
Date: 13 Sep 1999 05:37
Subject: Re: NO:  gif vs jpg

As I think most people will know, I like books.

Does anyone know of a book that will tell me in simple terms about all the
various formats used for transmiting E-mail text, diagrams and pictures.

Some people give one explanation and others quite different ones.

They give me endless problems and I am, well - Confused!

But if I could get hold of a good book........

David Lister.





From: Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 05:56
Subject: Re: NO- gif vs jpg

>===== Original Message From Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU> =====
>I don't know about really-fancy grayscaled diagrams
>[it seems that those usually are done in .pdf anyway, so I couldn't
>quickly find one to check].
I did a quick check with my diagrams of the traditional envelope at
http://beam.to/origami.
The .gif- file is 8669 bytes, the .jpg- file (with 'normal' compression) is
32529 bytes. With maximum compression the .jpg- file is 7222 bytes, but the
diagrams are ugly and blurred.

Matthias 'compression' Gutfeldt





From: Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 06:01
Subject: Re: Cartoon Origami

>===== Original Message From Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU> =====
>But Dr. Lang did invent an origami Opus (the chubby little penguin from the
>now-defunct "Bloom County" cartoon), which was in the '88 Annual
>Collection, as I recall.  Did Berke Breathed ever receive one?  I don't

Wow, Opus-gami?? Can someone please copy&send me the diagrams? Or will OUSA
sue for copyright infringement? Let's say I need them for 'educational
purposes' :-).

Matthias Gutfeldt





From: Dorothy Engleman <FoldingCA@WEBTV.NET>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 06:05
Subject: Re: NO:  gif vs jpg

Hi David!

You asked for a recommendation for a book..."that will tell me in simple
terms about all the various formats used for transmiting E-mail text,
diagrams and pictures."

How about a web page?

http://Net4TV.com/voice/story.cfm?StoryID=39

Dorothy





From: Dave Mitchell <davemitchell@MIZUSHOBAI.FREESERVE.CO.UK>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 07:37
Subject: Re: Creativity Criteria

Michael J. Naughton wrote:

>I fully agree that just
>because something seems "simple" in hindsight doesn't mean it's not truly
>"creative" -- but doesn't that complicate the issue of defining the
difference
>between "truly creative" and "a variation"?

Maybe - but the point was that even simple variations can be truly creative.
You have to look at them in the context of their time.

I wrote:
> . . .Is this how it happened? I'd always assumed that XYZ
> was an independent discovery which just happens to bear this
straightforward
> relationship to Robert Neale's model.

Michael replied:
>For the record, I have no idea how it happened -- I noticed the
relationship
>several years ago, but before then I had never heard anyone else compare
the
>two models. I do know that Dr. Neale did extensive explorations of the
>modular possiblities of the waterbomb base, both ring-based and
sphere-based
>(in particular, he invented a 12-piece version of the 12-pointed Omega
Star);
>much of this, alas, has never been published as far as I know.

Uh oh! In about 1989 I discovered the twelve-piece version for myself. I've
always been particularly proud of it and just diagrammed it for a new book.
Should have known Bob would have got there first ....

>For someone with his talent, the six-piece ornament seems like a fairly
obvious model
>(of course, in hindsight) -- more obvious than the "XYZ", so it's hard for
>me to imagine that the latter was invented first.

I wasn't saying this. Just that the connection is not actually obvious when
folding the two models and so I had always supposed - without any evidence -
that XYZ was an entirely independent discovery (arrived at as a result of
exploratory folding) and not deduced from the six-piece octahedral ornament.
At a guess I'd say that very few folk have ever made the connection you
have. I knew both models for ten years or so before I realised it myself.

>Since both models were
>published in "The Flapping Bird", with Neale's earlier, I'd be surprised if

>he and Sullivan were unaware of each other's work (but this is all pure
>speculation on my part. . .).

Good point - but if Ed sullivan had deduced his model you might have
expected a note to say so?

>Does this mean that the only "originality" was shown by Jack Skillman
(credited
>with making the first model out of identical components), and that everyone
>since, from Neale and Sullivan to Sonobe and Fuse, have simply been doing
>variations on the theme?

This bears on the very obscure early history of modular origami about which
I'd love to know more. Beyond that he allegedly found four separate ways to
combine cootie catchers I know very little about Jack Skillman's modular
work, and absolutely nothing about the date that he produced it.

On the other hand there is some evidence that a modular box made out of
identical (but cut) components was known in Japan as early as 1794 - though
the idea does not seem to have been developed further.

What I was trying to do was move the debate on originality away from folding
technique and focus it on ideas. We often make the assumption that folding a
different subject is the same thing as folding an original model. It isn't.
You can use the same technique with only minor modifications to make a
hundred animals (Yoshizawa) or a hundred polyhedra (Krystyna Burczyk). On
the other hand you can make the same animal or the same polyhedron in a
hundred different ways. (Nobody yet - thank goodness!) Okay - I'm
exagerrating for effect - but my point is that in the first case you need
just one idea and lots of application, while in the second case you need
lots of ideas and some basic skill to back them up.

In a way all modular origami is a variation on a very broad theme, but the
folders you mention have all demonstrated the ability to make the sideways
intuitive jumps that true originality requires.

Dave Mitchell





From: Kimberly Shuck <atsina@HOOKED.NET>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 07:52
Subject: Re: Origami non-sighting

And for that I thank you Scott.

Kim
>     I have a daughter in the 7th grade, but I hereby promise the list that I
> will make NO ATTEMPT WHATSOEVER to create models of any of the Backstreet
> Boys.
>
> Scott scram@landmarknet.net
> Littleton, NH USA





From: "Dr. Joel M. Hoffman" <joel@EXC.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 08:22
Subject: NO- gif vs jpg

>Dr. O'Hanlon's comment about standardizing on an -image- format that
>would fit on both US letter and A4 paper is an excellent one, but I'd
>like to make one tiny suggestion: consider .jpg instead of .gif.  jpg
>files are *MUCH* [emphasis on the 'much'!] smaller than .gif files and as
>far as I know are just as universally displayable/printable/creatable [is
>there a drawing system that'll only create .gif and not .jpg files?  web

This is certainly true (that .jpg's are much smaller than .gif's).
Unfortunately, the jpg format is particularly unsuited to sharp lines,
and so when you store a diagram that has lines (as opposed to a
photograph, which generally doesn't have sharp lines) in jpg format,
the lines all end up very blurry.

-Joel





From: "Kennedy, Mark" <KennedyM@DNB.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 09:16
Subject: Paper size and star

I had a surprise last year when I was privileged to attend the Colombian
Origami Convention. Colombia uses the standard US 8.5 x 11 inch paper. The
cost of changing over to the A4 is the barrier. All of our newer photo copy
machines take A4 with some minor adjustments.

David, I need to ask you: When is the  EU going to have a standard plug? I
suspect that we will get A4 as a standard size first. A few years back the
Federal Government has made metric the standard for military contracts to
"force" industry to shift to the international standards.

The multipoint star that was in ORU could be a model that Tomoko Fuse first
created and published. Nick Robinson had independently created a few years
later and gave a copy of the diagrams to Paul Jackson. Later, Nick met
Tomoko and showed her model. Later she sent him the book that it was
published in; it was several years previously. In the meantime, Paul had the
diagrams and permission to use them from Nick and put them in one of his
books. Nick sent a hasty note to Tomako. Origami USA (FOCA) at the time use
the model for the annual gift. I rediagramed it for distribution and gave
Tomoko first billing with a subline in parentheses noting that it was also
independently created by Nick. The separate independent creations is a
common experience. Until there is real money to made in Origami, we will not
have need for a separate classification for Origami patents to track
creators.

Mark





From: Rob Hudson <FashFold@AOL.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 09:28
Subject: Big Chain stores are GREAT!

Destroy the big chains?

I say-- HECK NO!

They are the libraries of today-- where else can you sit and read the latest
published books for HOURS on end and not get hassled?  Where else can you go
and hang out until midnight on weekdays?  Where else will you find the huge
selection of titles that you can order online later?

Hmmph.  I suppose you're all against Wal-Mart, too?

(where else can you go and beat up midnight shoppers with Nerf sticks on
Saturday nights?)

Rob'





From: Scott Cramer <scram@LANDMARKNET.NET>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 10:10
Subject: NO: A4 paper in the US

Valerie Vann posted:

>One problem with European size paper I run into all the time
at work (where I'm responsible for a large company library)
is that it sticks out of the top of binders and catalogs and
other A4 size publications sometimes are too tall for our
bookshelves. <

    Why did the US adopt 8 1/2 x 11 in the first place? The A sizes, and
their elegant property of maintaining proportion when divided, seems far
better suited for all manner of uses than the seemingly arbitrary size used
here in the states. I'm sure there is a logical reason behind the choice.
Can any one out there steer me to the answer?

Scott scram@landmarknet.net
Littleton, NH USA





From: Scott Cramer <scram@LANDMARKNET.NET>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 10:24
Subject: Origami non-sighting

Robert Lang writes:

>If you are the parent or relative of a 3rd- or 4th-grade boy, you can
hardly
>have escaped the all-consuming passion of "Pokemon," which comes from Japan
>and consists of videogames, TV shows, and trading cards, as well as Pokemon
>(TM) Brand clothes, lunchboxes, air, and water.

    I have a daughter in the 7th grade, but I hereby promise the list that I
will make NO ATTEMPT WHATSOEVER to create models of any of the Backstreet
Boys.

Scott scram@landmarknet.net
Littleton, NH USA





From: Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 14:26
Subject: Re: Creativity Criteria

>===== Original Message From Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU> =====
>Maybe - but the point was that even simple variations can be truly creative.
>You have to look at them in the context of their time.

I suppose the invention of the wheel was such a 'simple variation': The old
method for moving heavy objects was to use a large number of round logs on
which you placed the heavy object.
Then someone had the idea to cut the log into slices and fix those slices to a
cart, and load the heavy object on the cart. Quite simple, really, but it made
a world of a difference. And it saved a few trees, too :-).

Matthias Gutfeldt





From: DORIGAMI@AOL.COM
Date: 13 Sep 1999 14:41
Subject: Re: articles on origami

In an email from Michael Janson he mentions origami for the visually
handicapped.  If anyone is interested many years ago I wrote and had
published  a manual and audio tape called Perceptual Development thru
Paperfolding. This was done with Kimbo Educational Record Co.  It was
purchased and used at the Overbrook School for the Blind in Pennsylvania very
successfully and they raved over it and wanted me to write more of the same.
Though it is out of print now, I still have some of  them left and will sell
them at a reduced price to anyone who could use them for the visually
handicapped. My grandson is visually impaired and really enjoys origami a
lot.....If you are interested I will give you my address...Dorigami@aol.com





From: DORIGAMI@AOL.COM
Date: 13 Sep 1999 14:41
Subject: Re: Origami for the visually impaired

In a message dated 9/13/99 2:35:17 PM, DORIGAMI writes:

<< In an email from Michael Janson he mentions origami for the visually
handicapped.  If anyone is interested many years ago I wrote and had
published  a manual and audio tape called Perceptual Development thru
Paperfolding. This was done with Kimbo Educational Record Co.  It was
purchased and used at the Overbrook School for the Blind in Pennsylvania very
successfully and they raved over it and wanted me to write more of the same.
Though it is out of print now, I still have some of  them left and will sell
them at a reduced price to anyone who could use them for the visually
handicapped. My grandson is visually impaired and really enjoys origami a
lot.....If you are interested I will give you my address...Dorigami@aol.com >>





From: DORIGAMI@AOL.COM
Date: 13 Sep 1999 14:48
Subject: Re: cross made from the margins of a dollar bill

Hi everyone, Last year someone wrote the directions for making a dollar bill
cross by folding the margins of the bill into the middle.  It started by
doing a bookfold the long way and then doing a cupboard door fold, I think. I
simply cant remember the next two or three simple steps.   Any one remember
the directions and maybe could repeat them for me.......My magician friend
wants me to make him  one.  Thanks, Dorigami@aol.com.





From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 14:52
Subject: Re: Cartoon Origami

Valerie Vann wrote:
>
> <<Why not characters?!?  From cartoons.  Or movies.
>
> Robert Lang mentioned one reason why not in his initial post:
> copyright & trademark issues. Companies like Disney are rabid
> in defense of their rights;

But the solution is obvious!  Create your own cartoon characters.  I
don't recall seeing Joisel's Rat in the Saturday morning lineup.

--
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: DORIGAMI@AOL.COM
Date: 13 Sep 1999 15:01
Subject: Re: disaster classes

Regarding disaster classes, I hope this will become a thread...This could be
very interesting!  My biggest disaster that I remember the best was at the
Museum of Nat. Hist.  when I came all the way into N.Y.  from Freehold, N. J.
to teach a class on money folding.  There were at least 20 people in the
class and one lady became very nasty and accused me of not teaching the
models mentioned in the brochure (I was getting to them) and she threw me off
altogether in what I was doing and I was near tears.  It was embarrassing!
Thank heaven, I don't remember her name or her face only how hurt my feelings
were.  Thanks to lots of experience I was able to get myself together after
she walked out.  I have had people in classes who had trouble keeping up but
never in my 32 years of experience of teaching origami was someone as rude as
she was (and I was a volunteer to boot.)  Oh, well....anyone else have
experiences to share.
Dorothy Kaplan





From: John Marcolina <jmarcoli@CISCO.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 15:13
Subject: Webpage Update

Hi All,

I've been playing around with digital cameras lately (Sony Mavica and a Nikon
     Coolpix 700), and I re-photographed a lot of the models on my site, plus
     added some new ones. I'm finding that a digital camera beats the heck out
     of the way I was doing it befo

See if you agree:

http://www.employees.org/~jmarcoli/

I appreciate any feedback anyone has!

John Marcolina
San Jose, CA.
jmarcoli@cisco.com
http://www.employees.org/~jmarcoli/





From: KADUKU <kaduku@CDEPOT.NET>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 15:32
Subject: a ststue of liberty video tape

A few months their was a posting by a person who was selling video tapes
of a model called the statue of liberty by a m. shall.
can any one help me ,get in touch with this person,since, i would like
to buy a copy of the tape.

sincely
f.e. gullatt

thasnk you for your time





From: Leigh Halford <Leigh451@AOL.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 16:09
Subject: Calender again

Sorry to be a pain, but I have lost the ISBN number for the Fold a Day
Calender (oops) If anybody who knows it could let me know I would be most
grateful

Ta

Leigh451@aol.com
http://hometown.aol.com/origami451/index.html





From: P Bailey <pbailey@OPENCOMINC.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 16:30
Subject: Re: NO- gif vs jpg

Bernie Cosell wrote:

> so I guess you're right: for most origami diagrams, .gif *would* be the
> best format to store it in...
>
>   /bernie\

On the other hand if doing a photo instead of a diagram you would be
correct, jpeg is better.

Perry

--
"Each time he shifted gears he did it as if the Moment of Truth
had arrived in a bullfight"
H. Allen Smith "The Pig in the Barber Shop"

http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/           <--Website w/ diagrams!
Icq 23622644





From: Rob Hudson <FashFold@AOL.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 16:40
Subject: Re: NO- gif vs jpg

Actually, as long as you can see the valley and mountain lines, it really
doesn't matter. I have been in the process of scanning loose diagrams, and am
able to preserve the content in a "medium" sized JPG.  The nominal increase
in quality for a .GIF isn't worth it.

If you really want to do a diagram justice, re-draw it in a vector package
and drop it into .PDF form.





From: Julia Palffy <jupalffy@BLUEWIN.CH>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 17:29
Subject: The sense of touch

I'm interested by Kun Chang's request for info about origami and the sense of
     touch.
I'd like to hear more about this subject too, if anyone has information to
     offer.
TIA,

Julia Palffy
Zug, Switzerland
jupalffy@bluewin.ch





From: "Kennedy, Mark" <KennedyM@DNB.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 17:29
Subject: Cartoon-a-gami

Jerry,

You remember right. I was diagram editor when we got a batman diagram from
Jeff Beynon. I talked to DC and ask permission. They said send a letter - I
did. The letter acknowledged their ownership of the Batman and that I could
not publishe without their permission, FOCA was a nonprofit organization and
the whole thing was not for profit. I got such a stinging letter back that I
was shaking for a half hour. I regreted all of the ribbing that I taken from
my brother (the Marvel collector) for my collection of Superman comics... I
was considering dumping the whole the whole collection. The letter threaten
me and my first born if I ever published their whole team would descend on
me like the mongul hordes.

Many years later, OUSA got a diagram from Gabriel Alverez from Spain for
Batman diagrams. Having been stung the first time and wanting to publish the
diagrams, we ask our lawyer for help. On reviewing the past letter
exchanges, he was surprised how threatening that the response was. His
attempt for permission was about the same as mine-negative but a bit more
polite.

This explains why there are not more Cartoon origami models. I suspect that
Enterprise, X-Wing fighters, C3PO's and such would suffer a similar fate if
permission was sought. IS there a TARDIS model out there?

Mark





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 17:44
Subject: Re: Cartoon-a-gami

Mark Kennedy indited:

> This explains why there are not more Cartoon origami models. I suspect that
> Enterprise, X-Wing fighters, C3PO's and such would suffer a similar fate if
> permission was sought. IS there a TARDIS model out there?

Or at least why there are not so many diagrams published by origami societies
(targets for legal blood letting).

But there may be something else at work here too. What is being asked of the
artists (and their marketting and merchandising machines, some of considerable
size) is to distribute diagrams. And what are diagrams but instructions for
making likenessess of their work. Think of the possibilities (from their point
of view), hordes of folders able to make an image, unlicensed, unreviewed, of
unchecked quality, for purposes potentially commercial, (or in the case of a
poorly executed model, detrimental to the art and its merchandisability) and
no doubt in direct competition with their own merchandising enterprises.
Whther that would actually happen or not is irrelevant. It _could_ happen. Its
like giving a mint or toy factory a mold and saying "Go ahead, make the
images, do what you will" (or I could imagine a laywer making that analogy).

I would guess that the likelihood of getting permission is directly related to
how far past the laywers you can get, to the people (say George Lucas himself,
for example) who would understand the nature of the request and be more likely
to grant it. If you just "talk" to the wall of laywers, you'll probably get a
cookie cutter rejection letter.

Just my $0.02
        -D'gou





From: Marc Kirschenbaum <contract@PIPELINE.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 17:48
Subject: Re: disaster classes

Hi all,

The weirdest disaster class happened to me back in the mid '80s. I came to
the convention for the main purpose of learning David Shall's Statue of
Liberty (I told my school I would do a project with that model), and as
luck would have it, I was scheduled to teach during that time. To further
rub salt in my wounds, only one person showed up to my class (I was
teaching my "Bull" if anyone is still interested). Actually, the story has
a real happy ending. As it turns out, this guy who was in my class was
probably the only other person in the world at that time (other than the
creator of course) who knew how to fold that model, as he was the one who
helped prepare the paper (and it also explains why he was the only one at
my class). He taught me the model in about ten minutes, and I was able to
walk by the Statue of Liberty class with a completed model in hand (David
Shall is a notoriously s-l-o-w teacher).  We should all have disasters like
that....Marc





From: collin weber <coljwebwhs@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 18:01
Subject: Japanese language origami books

I have been looking on the fascinating folds page and I've seen alot of
great looking books.  The problem is that most of them are In Japanese.  How
difficult is it to fold from these books with no available text?  I pretty
experienced and I'm looking for the most complex things that I can possible
find.  Some title I noticed were Super Complex Origami,  Origami Fantasy,
and many books of flowers.  Anyone with comments on any of these books or
others , could you please contact me.  One other book that I'm curious about
is by J. C. Nolan.  I cna't remember the name but it looks like alot of
reading and I'm not sure how much folding there is in it.  All your comments
would be greatly appreciated.

Collin

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





From: Kimberly Shuck <atsina@HOOKED.NET>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 19:14
Subject: Re: Cartoon-a-gami

Doug Philips wrote:
> I would guess that the likelihood of getting permission is directly related to
> how far past the laywers you can get, to the people (say George Lucas himself,
> for example) who would understand the nature of the request and be more likely
> to grant it. If you just "talk" to the wall of laywers, you'll probably get a
> cookie cutter rejection letter.
>
> Just my $0.02
>         -D'gou

I would agree with Doug. I think that George would allow such a thing if it were
not a profit making venture. In fact, I think he'd be rather tickled. It's not
often the creative folk that are involved with all of the negativity... mostly
the legal folk. Disney is a totally different issue. They seem cranky all the
way up the ladder (judging from experiences of friends who worked for
     Touchstone).

Kim





From: Kimberly Crane <kcrane@KIMSCRANE.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 19:18
Subject: Re: Cartoon-a-gami

This is not just a threat against origamists. All other crafts that I
have been involved in and others I have not - but have heard the horror
stories - we have all been warned that any type of crafts that resemble
any character past, present, and even still on the drawing boards will
be prosecuted to the full extent of the law if something resembling
their creation is copied without their permission. (which is never
given.)   The character artist arm is long and their pocket books thick,
so if such origami character models are developed, please do it
discreetly!
Sincerely,
Kimberly Crane

Doug Philips wrote:
>
> Mark Kennedy indited:
>
> > This explains why there are not more Cartoon origami models. I suspect that
> > Enterprise, X-Wing fighters, C3PO's and such would suffer a similar fate if
> > permission was sought. IS there a TARDIS model out there?
>
> Or at least why there are not so many diagrams published by origami societies
> (targets for legal blood letting).
>
> But there may be something else at work here too. What is being asked of the
> artists (and their marketting and merchandising machines, some of considerable
> size) is to distribute diagrams. And what are diagrams but instructions for
> making likenessess of their work. Think of the possibilities (from their point
> of view), hordes of folders able to make an image, unlicensed, unreviewed, of
> unchecked quality, for purposes potentially commercial, (or in the case of a
> poorly executed model, detrimental to the art and its merchandisability) and
> no doubt in direct competition with their own merchandising enterprises.
> Whther that would actually happen or not is irrelevant. It _could_ happen. Its
> like giving a mint or toy factory a mold and saying "Go ahead, make the
> images, do what you will" (or I could imagine a laywer making that analogy).
>
> I would guess that the likelihood of getting permission is directly related to
> how far past the laywers you can get, to the people (say George Lucas himself,
> for example) who would understand the nature of the request and be more likely
> to grant it. If you just "talk" to the wall of laywers, you'll probably get a
> cookie cutter rejection letter.
>
> Just my $0.02
>         -D'gou





From: collin weber <coljwebwhs@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 19:29
Subject: Re: Origami Inspirations

>From: Ronald Koh <ronkoh@SINGNET.COM.SG>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: Origami Inspirations
>Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 17:50:59 +0800
>
>How about showing us some of your origami, Colin? Sounds interesting.
>
>Inspiration is all around us, waiting to be discovered. I get mine
>usually from books on nature, the zoo, aquarium, even National
>Geographic and Discovery Channels.
>
>If folding animals isn't enough, try folding action models, e.g.
>dioramas of a herd of horses in full flight, racing dogs, an eagle with
>a rabbit in it's claws, falcon with a fish, bear with a salmon in its
>mouth, a crocodile in combat with a boa constrictor, or a dog doing what
>comes naturally - with a single sheet of paper, no cuts, etc.
>
>Anybody up to the challenge?!
>

Ronald Koh

Thank you so much for writing me.  Is your work displayed anywhere that I
can see it?  I saw some of your stuff on the oriland sight and it looked
really great.  You seem to be the exact same type of origamist that I am.  I
love folding animals.  Especially the strange ones. Birds are my favorite
but I've made all different kinds.  I don't have many diagrams or pictures
to show although I would like to get some soon.  I usually use the same
sources for my inspiration.  Often times my animals are so strange that no
one I can find has ever heard of them and can't rellay tell if it is a good
representation of it or not.  I really like some of your suggestions and
I'll be sure to try them.  I'm not sure about the one piece of paper.
Hopefully I can show some of my things later. How would I do that?  What is
the best may to put pictures or digrams on the computer?  Or even just
making the digrams?  I would appreciate your advice very much.

Collin

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





From: Dorothy Engleman <FoldingCA@WEBTV.NET>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 20:43
Subject: Re: Cartoon-a-gami

Because Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck and Goofy were set to enter the public
domain in 2003, Disney may have had a hand in passing the Sonny Bono
Copyright Extension Act of 1998, which extends copyright protection from
50 years after an author's death to 70 years:

http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/17327.html

I am very grateful that a federal lawsuit is seeking to overturn the
extension. Alot of independent artists are being adversely affected by
this Act. The copyrights of two songs in Folding California, which were
due to expire shortly, must now be licensed for an additional 20 years.

As the article points out..."there needs to be a balance between
financially encouraging artists to create and having works become
available to the public domain for widespread use, free from
restrictions."

Dorothy





From: "Michael J. Naughton" <mjnaught@CROCKER.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 21:15
Subject: Re: Creativity Criteria

Dave Mitchell wrote:
> . . . the point was that even simple variations can be truly
> creative. You have to look at them in the context of their time.
> . . . .
> the folders you mention have all demonstrated the ability to make
> the sideways intuitive jumps that true originality requires.

I'm sorry -- perhaps I didn't express myself clearly. I agree
completely that simple variations can be truly creative (and also
that complex variations need not be!).

My point, really, with all respect, is that being told that "true"
creativity involves a "sideways intuitive jump" doesn't seem to
give me a very good tool for deciding whether a particular model
is "creative". I agree that Shen's "Omega Star" is a creative variation
of Sullivan's "XYZ", but suppose I didn't? Suppose I said that
the phrase "sideways intuitive jump" doesn't mean anything to
me, and that all Philip Shen did was to demonstrate that the twelve
corners on Sullivan's model could be made sharper by some simple
creases?

In other words, what makes it "sideways"? How come it's "intuitive"
(and not "deductive")? What makes it a "jump"?

Perhaps you can help. . . .

Mike "Agreeable, but not yet enlightened" Naughton





From: Deg Farrelly <DEG.FARRELLY@ASU.EDU>
Date: 13 Sep 1999 21:48
Subject: Diagrams of Cartoon Characters and Object Models

In response to:

<Why not characters?!?  From cartoons.  Or movies.>

Valerie wrote:

<Robert Lang mentioned one reason why not in his initial post:
copyright & trademark issues. Companies like Disney are rabid
in defense of their rights; the creator of cartoon origami
models might be able to get away with distributing designs for
free, but had better not call them by their proper names, and
publishing the diagrams would be totally out of the question.>

Several years ago a young folder (I am sorry, I do not recall the name)
invented a wonderful model of Batman's face.  As I recall, it had a color
change, and the eyeholes in the mask were very precise.  It was to be
published in the Annual Collection (which was still the Friends of the
Origami Center Convention Program at the time, I believe).

But Warner Brothers, who hold the copyright on Batman got wind of it - I
think because they were contacted for permission to publish.  They refused
the permission, and the model could not even by published under the name
"Masked Man" because the likeness to the comic book figure was so strong.

Sigh.

As for other models... I have never been particularly fond of animal models
(tho I bought Origami for the Animal Enthusiast solely to fold the Lobster).
I have always preferred models of everyday objects.

Some of my very favorite models have been models of objects:  Hulme's Jack
in the Box, Shall's Candlestick and Hammer models, Crawford's Baby Grand
Piano and Three Masted Ship models, Martin Wall's Book, Momotami's Train
Engine, the Baby Carriage, Brill's Bottle and Pack of Cigarettes models,
Cooker's Strawberry, the Apple, Petty's Cactus in a Pot, the $ shirt, and
Momotami's High Heel.

deg farrelly
deg@asu.edu





From: Foldmaster@AOL.COM
Date: 13 Sep 1999 22:46
Subject: Re: a ststue of liberty video tape

In a message dated 9/13/99 3:33:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
kaduku@CDEPOT.NET writes:

<< A few months their was a posting by a person who was selling video tapes
 of a model called the statue of liberty by a m. shall.
 can any one help me ,get in touch with this person,since, i would like
 to buy a copy of the tape.

 sincely
 f.e. gullatt

  >>
I believe that the person you are referring to is deg farrelly.  He was
selling copies of the video tapes at the Origami USA convention this year in
NYC.  He can be reached by e-mail at:     DEG.FARRELLY@ASU.EDU

Sincerely,

June Sakamoto





From: "Kennedy, Mark" <KennedyM@DNB.COM>
Date: 14 Sep 1999 00:22
Subject: Folding by Touch

Several years ago Subaru Kase came to New York for the OUSA convention. He
is a blind folder. I watched him teach his class to see how he folds a
model. I noticed that he held the paper between his  thumb and middle finger
and used his index finger as a stop. When doing a book fold, he would hold
both the side edges in this way. By the feel of his index finger, he could
tell when the corner was square, at which point he put a large pinch to mark
the spot. He then repeated this on the other side. Then he made the crease
after the starting and ending point were marked.

I noticed that he also use to fold the the folded edges as they were easier
to "see" than a crease. I have used this in my folding as well. It also
means that you can fold while doing other activities.

Dr. Ron Levy was discussing the idea of using Origami as part of physical
therapy. This goes back to the mid-80s so my memory is not entirely sure -
but there were seven wrist actions that exercised during therapy. Ron was
trying to figure away to incorporate folding modulars or other models to
accomplish these tasks and do something useful at the same time. I suspect
his residency program and marriage interferred with fully developing this
program.

I hope this helps.

Mark Kennedy
