




From: "JacAlArt ." <jacalart@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 13 Oct 1999 13:18
Subject: Re: The Paper (Am I Alone In This?)(OUSA Annuals)

<<<<
S Cramer wrote:
And nowhere in this discussion have I seen mention of OUSA's annual
collection, the largest compendium of models, in all categories of
difficulty and type, that is published on a regular basis.
>>>>
The Annuals are fine -- and free to those of us who contribute! I contribute
(and have been published in the last 4 or so) because I get one for free. I
think many other contributors do the same -- which is why the collection is
so diverse and interesting. The Paper offers nothing, which is perhaps why
fewer contribute? Or do the editors simply choose where to place diagrams
and choose to place the more challenging in Annuals and keep the modulars
for The Paper? In any case, the Annuals are a separate thing altogether! You
pay SEPARATELY for it. I was speaking originaly of what my OUSA Membership
comes with. The Paper. Not The Annuals. And I am not happy with what I
receive with my membership -- nor am I pleased with the response I've gotten
from OUSA in the past. Again, maybe Marc K will change things. It appears
that so far, however, he has not. I still enjoy his models. I have enormous
respect for him as a creator. This doesn't mean I have to like him as an
editor.

~Jac

>From: Scott Cramer <scram@LANDMARKNET.NET>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: The Paper (Am I Alone In This?)
>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:36:31 -0400
>
>Two cents time...
>
>     I'm sure that once the list has hashed it about and the people
>responsible for The Paper  have had a chance to digest it all, we'll get
>the
>point of view of OUSA on why they include or exclude the diagrams they do.
>I'm pretty sure I've read something of the sort before, but an archive
>search isn't on the schedule this morning.
>
>     My guess is that the purpose of The Paper is to reach the OUSA
>membership with news and features about origami and the people who fold it,
>not to be a cutting-edge source of the latest models. I think that those of
>us who are fascinated with this pastime look to more sources for our
>folding
>fix than the couple of diagrams every few months that The Paper provides.
>And nowhere in this discussion have I seen mention of OUSA's annual
>collection, the largest compendium of models, in all categories of
>difficulty and type, that is published on a regular basis.
>
>Scott scram@landmarknet.net
>Littleton, NH USA
>

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





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: 13 Oct 1999 13:48
Subject: balance in ori-mags

Scott Cramer <scram@LANDMARKNET.NET> sez

>My guess is that the purpose of The Paper is to reach the OUSA
>membership with news and features about origami and the people who fold it,
>not to be a cutting-edge source of the latest models.

I agree. The days when ori magazines were the best & often only source
for diagrams are long past. Complex fans are well catered for in both
books, Tanteidan productions & web sites. Few web sites include the kind
of gossip, theory & reviews that ori mags do. It's about getting a
balance & sadly, complex models disturb that balance by their very
nature (there are only so many pages available!)

I would rather see 6 simple models than one complex model (or indeed,
1/3 of a complex model!), but there's not always 6 *good* simple models
out there every time.

In the end, it's down to the editor (giving his/her time freely) to
choose & if you don't like it, stand for the position at the next
elections....

all the best,

Nick Robinson

email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - now featuring soda syphons!
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: 13 Oct 1999 16:49
Subject: Re: The Paper (Am I Alone In This?)

JacAlArt indited:

+elephant diagram I'll puke). Also -- I'm not the editor! It is a PAID
+SUBSCRIPTION! It is NOT my responsibility to provide them with content.
+It it were free, or if diagrammers were paid, maybe it would be
+different. I do contribute of my own free will. I do it because I like
+to share -- but I should not be 'expected' to do so!

Jac(AlArt) raises a very good point.  If any on this list belong to
B.O.S. (I know there are at least a few), you might have noticed that
when Rick Beech took over editing the B.O.S. Magazine he had a clear
goal of getting more diagrams into print. As he himself said, the first
thing he looks for in the new issue is the diagrams, and he felt that
was what many/most others looked for too. Not the only thing, but an
important one.

You know what, he also had the guts to publish a highly complex model
in three parts! Horrors! You can't start and finish the model in one
magazine? ;-) Nope! The old Tanteidan Magazine/Newsletter often did the
same thing. OUSA's The Paper could as well.

I'm inclined to agree with Perry Bailey and say that with a new editor
and all the other "focus" changes going on at OUSA, it may take a few
issues for things to settle out. Marc Kirschenbaum has posted in the
past that they get complaints when they run complex diagrams. Perhaps
there are more members who want simple/intermediate models than there
are who want complex ones. In any event, I do no envy the editor trying
to balance the various demands. I had very much hoped that there would
be a membership survey, so that the interests/desires/focus of the
entire membership could be known, instead of guessed at.

I might also go along with the idea that perhaps putting everything
into The Paper is not the best way to do things. If OUSA has only one
vehicle to communicate with membership then it has to be an "all
terrain vehicle" which is not best suited for any one specific task.

One could take a position that since OUSA already puts out a prodigious
Annual Collection of model diagrams, that putting additional model
diagrams into The Paper is kinda silly. One could also say that the
Annual Collections have gotten to be unwieldy big. B.O.S. puts out
two smaller collections per year (one for each convention). One could
also point out that the Annual Collection is an extra cost item, and
when looking at the cost/benefit of membership per se, the Annual
Collection is not a part of the equation.

Since, as has been pointed out, diagrams do not require the production
values needed for nice artwork, perhaps it would be better to have two
separate publications? They needn't even have the same publishing
schedule/time frame. For example, maybe six issues per year of a
quality inexpensive diagram publication (say, keep it at 2oz or less),
and four issues of glossy photos and member news, etc. Given the space
that would be freed up from diagrams, there would actually be room for
The Paper to contain more substantive articles and even serve as a
forum to have members speak on important issues (such as, how to
incorporate your group for tax and insurance benefits, what directions
your group is going and what directions you'd like to see OUSA going
in, how your exhibits have gone, what your experiences were with the
travelling OUSA exhibits (good points and bad ones)), etc. etc. etc.

If I have any complaints about The Paper (having to speak historically,
since I am not privvy to any plans for it), they are not with the
diagrams either in number or complexity, but with the lack of a forum
for member to member communications. There is an attitude, counterpoint
to JacAlArt's, that OUSA is some kind of obligation. The one ought to
just send them money and be grateful for whatever they do in return.
But JacAlArt is correct, OUSA is not some moral "do gooder" association
that Feeds the Hungry, Shelters the Misfortunate, etc. It has to
provide some benefit for membership if it wishes to attract and retain
members. One might argue that it already does good things, but that
they aren't well enough publicized. Perry is also correct, that with a
volunteer run organization, the membership needs to supply as well as
demand. The challenge is how to organize such a thing. In the past, the
organization has been centered around NYC, both physically, and
psychicly. I strongly hope that with the changes being proposed, OUSA
can truly live up to its name. That it can find a way to both draw upon
and provide value to, national membership. I am concerned but still
hopeful that this can be done. One part of those changes in the new
Paper.  I like the first step that has been taken, and am waiting to see
if the production timetable and content can be sustained. I hope that
OUSA's leadership will reach out to the membership to ask for, and
provide, more than just models for the yearly tree.

-D'gou





From: "Kennedy, Mark" <KennedyM@DNB.COM>
Date: 13 Oct 1999 17:10
Subject: Paper Diagrams

IT has been many years, since I served as diagram editor for the newsletter.
Back then, I tried to include three diagrams in each issue: one simple, one
intermediate and third either intermediate, high intermediate or complex.
Generally, there were space considerations as  the difficulty level
increases so do the pages. Most of the OUSA membership is folding at the
intermediate level or a bit lower. Just look at the distribution of class at
the convention.

 As the organization is growing and the art is evolving we are getting more
complex folders. Over the years I have seen two organization try to reach
out to those folders interested in the more challenging models: the Origami
Collection and Oru. The Origami Collection ran out of steam when the editor
shifted gears into computers and nobody was willing to take over the
publication. Oru went belly up. I do not believe that the critical mass has
been reached where a complex magazine can be self sustaining. A few more
challenging models are welcome in the Paper. I believe that Joseph Wu's
Eastern Dragon is a challenging model. I am happy to see the Origami House
publishing books for complex folders. In addition to being published in
Japan, the limited press runs also increase the cost. (hint: if you see an
interesting complex origami book - buy it now it may not be in print for
long)

When I first started, we did not send extra copies to the creators of models
until Mark Bolitho ask for some. It had not occurred to us at the time. It
was a serious omission that was corrected. I am not sure how things are
being handled now. Previously there was the Newsletter and the Annual
Collection. The Annual Collection got more submissions since if selected you
got a free book rather than a couple of newsletters. I believe that diagrams
are now unified under the Publications Committee. IT is a balancing act
between members, space and cost for which models to include.

I know that Jan Polish does solicit diagrams for the Annual Collection and
the Paper on her trips abroad. The Paper and the Annual Collection have
benefited from her ability to travel. and make contacts at the various
international conventions.

Since I have been able to get a number of international news letters and
convention books, I have noticed that the "good" complex or high
intermediate models are repeated from society to society around the world. I
do not complain about the repetition. One of the criteria for selecting a
model for the newsletter in my day was novelty - Was it a new model/ Had it
been diagramed before? Were are members likely to have seen the model?

In the final judgement, is it a model that our members would enjoy folding?

Mark Kennedy





From: "JacAlArt ." <jacalart@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 13 Oct 1999 19:06
Subject: Re: Paper Diagrams

<<<<
Mark K wrote:
Most of the OUSA membership is folding at the
intermediate level or a bit lower. Just look at the distribution of
class at
the convention.
>>>>

Certainly you don't mean for this to justify OUSA'a attitude of ignoring the
'complex minority'?!
Mr. Kennedy also noted he saw diagrams for any particular complex model
being recirculated throughout many foreign publications. If many foreign
publications are publishing it, then why not OUSA? If others are publishing
it, there is obviously a desire for them from others besides myself. It
seems I hold my breath until the Origami House puts out another Kawahata or
Yoshino book! At least they publish challenging models in their newsletters.
OUSA has clearly forgotten/ignored the 'complex minority'. I am just 1
person, but if OUSA -- the organization to which I send a yearly membership
fee -- continues to ignore me, they will lose a paying member who regularly
contributes diagrams of my own free will and kindness. (I have never been
asked to continue contributing, yet OUSA keeps publishing my stuff.) They
remind me of a Big Corporation who sees customers as numbers. My personal
feelings and desire are of no interest to them. They don't listen -- or they
don't want to be bothered. Well -- reading the replies to my original post,
it is clear that I am not alone. Maybe OUSA will be if they continue to
ignore paying members.

~JacAlArt

>From: "Kennedy, Mark" <KennedyM@DNB.COM>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Paper Diagrams
>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 17:07:29 -0400
>
>IT has been many years, since I served as diagram editor for the
>newsletter.
>Back then, I tried to include three diagrams in each issue: one simple, one
>intermediate and third either intermediate, high intermediate or complex.
>Generally, there were space considerations as  the difficulty level
>increases so do the pages. Most of the OUSA membership is folding at the
>intermediate level or a bit lower. Just look at the distribution of class
>at
>the convention.
>
>  As the organization is growing and the art is evolving we are getting
>more
>complex folders. Over the years I have seen two organization try to reach
>out to those folders interested in the more challenging models: the Origami
>Collection and Oru. The Origami Collection ran out of steam when the editor
>shifted gears into computers and nobody was willing to take over the
>publication. Oru went belly up. I do not believe that the critical mass has
>been reached where a complex magazine can be self sustaining. A few more
>challenging models are welcome in the Paper. I believe that Joseph Wu's
>Eastern Dragon is a challenging model. I am happy to see the Origami House
>publishing books for complex folders. In addition to being published in
>Japan, the limited press runs also increase the cost. (hint: if you see an
>interesting complex origami book - buy it now it may not be in print for
>long)
>
>When I first started, we did not send extra copies to the creators of
>models
>until Mark Bolitho ask for some. It had not occurred to us at the time. It
>was a serious omission that was corrected. I am not sure how things are
>being handled now. Previously there was the Newsletter and the Annual
>Collection. The Annual Collection got more submissions since if selected
>you
>got a free book rather than a couple of newsletters. I believe that
>diagrams
>are now unified under the Publications Committee. IT is a balancing act
>between members, space and cost for which models to include.
>
>I know that Jan Polish does solicit diagrams for the Annual Collection and
>the Paper on her trips abroad. The Paper and the Annual Collection have
>benefited from her ability to travel. and make contacts at the various
>international conventions.
>
>Since I have been able to get a number of international news letters and
>convention books, I have noticed that the "good" complex or high
>intermediate models are repeated from society to society around the world.
>I
>do not complain about the repetition. One of the criteria for selecting a
>model for the newsletter in my day was novelty - Was it a new model/ Had it
>been diagramed before? Were are members likely to have seen the model?
>
>In the final judgement, is it a model that our members would enjoy folding?
>
>Mark Kennedy

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





From: Ronald Koh <ronkoh@SINGNET.COM.SG>
Date: 13 Oct 1999 20:39
Subject: Re: Newcomer and Question

Carlos:

I think you have just about worn out the 'P' key on your keyboard!

'Jurassic Origami' is by Edwin Ee, a fellow Singaporean whom I have yet
to meet. I have not folded most of the models, as I bought the book
mainly for reference. The diagrams were computer-drawn, clear, and easy
to follow. I did not find any mistakes from the few models I folded.

There are 21 or so dinos in the book, most of which are two-piece models
in the intermediate range. Quite a few of the models appear to be
derivities of one another, i.e. same basic form and approach. Edwin has,
however, managed to capture the conformation and posture of each dino
pretty well IMHO, according to what is popularly known (or misconceived)
of the creatures. Each dino is readily recognizable and realistic enough
in a simple way. The models look particularly good when placed in a
diorama-type setting. A table is provided in the book showing the paper
sizes/proportions to be used for each dino according to a common scale.

And yes, there are three pages of coloured photos with various dinos in
confrontational, diorama settings. There are also 2D monochrome photos
of each of the folded dinos, which were apparently done with a scanner.

I should think that there should be no regrets getting this book, unless
one has a definite preference for more detailed and challenging origami.

Carlos Alberto Furuti wrote:

>
> P.S. Don't forget some points I mentioned above are also a matter of time.
> OF was published at least seven years after PO, and origami is evolving
> faster than microchips nowadays. As far as I know PO was the first origam
> book dedicated to dinosaurs, and most of its models were state-of-the-art
> at the time.
> P.P.S. I personally also like OF better, but PO's has a place of honor in
> my bookshelf too.
> P.P.P.S. The "bang-for-the-buck" factor applies here too. Is OF better?
> Maybe. But it's also 3-4x more expensive. Is OF's stegosaurus (ca. 1995)
> better than PO's (ca. 1985, since it was published in Top Origami, OftC's
> 1st edition)? It's more realistic no doubt. But it takes twice the effort
> and skill.
> P.P.P.P.S. Speaking of dinosaur books, does anyone have an opinion on
> D. Ee's "Jurassic Origami"?





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: 13 Oct 1999 21:17
Subject: Re: Paper Diagrams

Mark Kennedy indited:

Thanks for your insights, which I'd rather read more of, but am
satisfied with those you have the time to produce.

One particular point I must question:
+increases so do the pages. Most of the OUSA membership is folding at the
+intermediate level or a bit lower. Just look at the distribution of class at
+the convention.

I have to note, that one cannot judge by the classes offered at the
convention, because all the teachers are volunteers. Every year that I
have taught, I have been in consultation with someone at the main
office (usually Jan Polish), and about the only "direction" I've gotten
has been "Too many of those are already being taught." As far as I can
determine, the cross section of classes taught is solely due to the
volunteers wishing to teach. It would be interesting to see year by
year, which are the classes that sell out and what level they are. My
personal guess, in lieu of any hard data, is that a stunningly
presented model on the model menu would garner increased interest
regardless of its folding level classification. The sociology of class
taking appears to me to be rather subtle. I admit to sabotaging it
directly myself, by offering to teach models after hours, so that the
interested folder may take something else which conflicts with my
class.

-D'gou





From: collin weber <coljwebwhs@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 13 Oct 1999 21:43
Subject: Re: [NO] Australian wildflowers

>From: Michael Janssen-Gibson <mig@ISD.CANBERRA.EDU.AU>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: [NO] Australian wildflowers
>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:14:02 +1000
>
>On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, Chamberlain, Clare wrote:
>
> > And no, we don't have kangaroos in our backyards in Perth
>
>Actually we do in Canberra (well I had one hopping through my front yard
>last year), and there are a number of families of kangaroos that live in
>the bushland behind my workplace - if I look out the window at the
>right time I can see them grazing in the long grass. Sometimes you *can*
>believe the stories you hear about Australia ;}.
>
>regards
>Michael

I'm imlying from you email that you are from Australia and would be quite
familiar with Australian wildlife.  Could you tell me some internet sights
that show a lot of pictures of Australian wildlife.  I have been folding
Australian animals for a while and I am quite intrigued by their uniqueness.
  I've already created a Kangaroo Walaby, dugong, Emu, numbat, bilby,
crocodile, tasmanian devil and a few more.  Could you suggest some more
animals that I could fold.  I hope to some day make a book, but I'm not even
sure how people make them.

Thanks
Collin Weber

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





From: "Michael J. Naughton" <mjnaught@CROCKER.COM>
Date: 13 Oct 1999 22:37
Subject: Re: The Paper (Am I Alone in This?)

Here's my two cents on a few points:

JacAlArt complains about the lack of complex models,
but he goes on to say that his own contributions are
simply that -- contributions -- and he doesn't want to
feel obligated to increase them. Fine. Join the club.
Complain all you want (how would we stop you?), but
please remember that The Paper is what the contributors
make it. You want more "good" diagrams but you don't want
to do them yourself? I . . . wish . . . you . . . luck.

Several people point out that the Annual Collection has
lots of great diagrams, but it is "added cost". My OUSA
membership costs me $25 per year, and the Annual Collection
is $20 on top of that. I pay more to the BOS on a yearly
basis, and I get far fewer diagrams. On a dollar per diagram
basis, OUSA has every other organization I belong to beat by
a mile. If you really want regular diagrams, buy the Annual
Collection every year (or get it for free if you contribute
something) and divide it into twelve sections. Read one
section a month over the next year; then buy the next Collection
and start over. You'll be glad you did.

As for what we "get" for our OUSA membership, I'll admit to
being an old fogey on this. I am one of the lucky ones who
actually got to visit Lillian Oppenheimer in her apartment and
visit the Home Office when it was a (gradually growing) corner
in Alice Gray's office at the museum. That's where I learned
the Sonobe module (referred to then as "Toshie's Jewel"), the
Omega Star, and Robert Neale's dragon (handed do me without
comment at the end of one of my visits -- I took it home and
pulled it apart to figure out how it was done). I came to believe
that the work that Lillian and Alice had done, in collecting
models and diagrams (published and unpublished), promoting contact
among folders, and trying to spread the joy of sharing origami,
was a rare and beautiful achievement that I was extremely fortunate
to have had contact with. Every time I sent in my check, I hope that
at least some of it goes to preserving the texts, displaying the
models, and creating the same opportunities for others to learn
about paperfolding that I enjoyed. In short, I hope it continues the
work that they started. Personally, I'm sure it does, but I don't
ever expect to see a tangible "return" -- certainly not in "value
for dollar" represented by The Paper.

But I don't expect everyone to have that point of view. OUSA is
a volunteer organization, and if you don't like what it offers you
have two choices: step up to the plate and try to make a difference,
or opt out. I think both choices are equally valid, depending on
individual circumstances.

Mike "Okay, that's probably just about enough now" Naughton





From: Meristein@AOL.COM
Date: 13 Oct 1999 23:35
Subject: Re: The Paper (Am I Alone in This?)

Well said, Michael Naughton. But I'm sure you still managed to offend
somebody...

While we're at it(and perhaps I missed this portion of the thread) I would
like to congratulate Deb and all others involved in producing the Paper with
its new look. Having been in publishing, I know how much work has gone into
the redesign and expansion. The photo quality is very good, the banners are
easy to read, the whole look is open, inviting and contemporary, and the
content is informative and well written. For those of you looking for
dollar-to-product ratio for your annual dues, you are definitely getting your
money's worth of newsletter.

I favour the idea of rotating the complexity of models presented, varying
from simple to complex; or, in the alternative try Mark Kennedy's idea of
presenting models of different complexity within any given volume. Everybody
deserves a chance to be excited about the diagrams in the newsletter; if it
wasn't your turn this time, well...look forward to the next one. Finding out
what's going on origamically in the rest of the country and the world is
valuable as well, and I wouldn't want to see the space devoted to those
things curtailed every issue simply to accomodate steps 200-347 of anything.

Merida(climbing gingerly down off soapbox)





From: Marc Kirschenbaum <marckrsh@PIPELINE.COM>
Date: 13 Oct 1999 23:51
Subject: Re: The Paper (Am I Alone In This?)

Hi all,

As the current diagram editor for The Paper, I thought it would be apropos
to respond to this thread. Just so things are clear, I am not new to this
(I have been acting as diagram editor for more than a few years), but we do
have a new Managing Editor, Debra Nelson-Hogan (who, judging by the sleek
new look of the current issue is not new to editing). I have also seen our
newsletter evolve right from issue #1, and I am sure it will continue to
evolve. Incidently, the first issues did not even have any diagrams.
Perhaps this made the purpose of The Paper clearer, as it served to create
an origami community. It was exciting to read about how OUSA gained
not-for-profit status and secured its home in the museumj, to reading about
(then) up and comming artist like Robert Lang. The diagrams came much
later, and it never felt like the focal point of The Paper. If all I cared
about were diagrams, I guess I could just buy some good books, and fold
away im my little corner.

Since I was one of the managing editors for OUSA's publications for some
time, it seemed to make sence that I could help out in getting diagrams for
The Paper (yes, the diagrams are basicaly drawn from the same pool). Our
sources include the many generous contributions from around the world (and
as Mark Kennedy has mentioned, there will be overlap with other foriegn
publications), and from our archives. We get the same rang of models as any
other society gets, although I am under the impression we are able to
attract a grteater diversity of contributors (our Annual Collection is an
attestment to this).

All of this says nothing on how I narrow down this huge source to a
half-dozen pages every couple of months. The most important paramater I am
given is page count; going beyond the alloted 6 pages an issue costs money,
and with our issues comming out more frequently, I do not forsee an
expansion of that in the near future. I try to create diversity with my
choices, and that means shorter models. As an editor, I would much rather
publish a lengthy model in our Annual Collection than break it up over a
period of 6 months (and I would pity the member who had to join with the
comming of the last installment). There is not a lot of science to my
choices, but I am attracted to models that require little editing on my
part, come from a large pool of models of a single creator, or possibly had
a special request to be included in The Paper. Now our issues are becoming
increasingly theme-based, and I am trying to have my model choices follow suit.

So where does this leave complex models? Right now I am not sure. In the
past, I would easily say I would be pissing off most of our membership with
a model that only 2% of us could fold. The popularity of complex models has
increased, and I do not think it is always necessary to cater to the lowest
common denominator. With more frequent issues, perhaps one model an issue
could happen once or twice a year.

As for the next issue, we should be having an intermediate level dollar
bill fold that was talked a lot about on this list, and an old high
intermediate model by one of our (then) younger master folders (right now
he is in college). I happen to be excited about the whole retro feel these
models generate, which I thought would be nice for an issue themed on
origami by children.

That is it for now. I would be happy to field any questions/desires you
have to dish out.

Marc





From: Vicky Avery <vavery@WENET.NET>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 02:07
Subject: Event At Sasuga in Mass.

I just heard about an interesting event for those of you near Cambridge.

Its a neat concept - a Fold-A-Thon that Sasuga bookstore in Cambridge MA is
having.  Its coming up on Sat. Oct. 23 from 10 to 6, and the participants
will get sponsors to pledge for each crane that they fold.  This is a
benefit for the Jimmy Fund to help children with chronic and terminal
illnesses, and the cranes will be sent to Hiroshima Peace Park.  If you want
more information go to

http://www.sasugabooks.com/events/origamifoldathon.html

Vicky Mihara Avery





From: Vicky Avery <vavery@WENET.NET>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 02:53
Subject: Re: The Paper (Am I Alone in This?)

The Paper's updated looks & content (hooray) is just the first step of many
to come as we watch OrigamiUSA move forward. As pieces of the organization
are worked on we will move towards rebuilding the membership base and
perhaps only then be able to afford to expand the newsletter to contain more
models.

Of the many things that are in motion, one development that is particularly
exciting is that there will soon be an intern on staff at OUSA for one year,
straight from (and sponsored by) the design studios of Yamaguchi-san's
Origami House - the producer of the Tanteidan Magazine.

As soon as his English gets up to speed, the impact he will have on future
publications will be significant.  Perhaps this is the ideal time for those
of you with un-diagramed models to submit them to the home office!
(no...let's not inundate Lang, Wu,  etc with pleas.  I'm talking about YOU,
and me)

I like to believe that things are moving in the right direction for growing
& nuturing OrigamiUSA and all the comments put forth are important to hear.
But let's not mistake the few voices here for the bulk of the membership,
it's just a sampling.

Vicky Mihara Avery





From: Julie Rhodes <kettir@GEOCITIES.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 06:44
Subject: Re: ORIGAMI Digest - 11 Oct 1999 to 12 Oct 1999 (#1999-34)

On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:00:24 -0400, clare chamberlain wrote:

>And while I have you here, I was delighted the other day to find an origami
>book in the discount book shop - a rare finding indeed............but
>disappointed when I realised that the  book, entitled KOKIGAMI, was not
>exactly family folding, but rather, decorative appendages for our male
>members (!)and not even origami but paper cut-outs!!  Even at $4 I was too
>embarrassed to buy it ;-)

It was also in the children's section at my local half price bookstore.
Apparently it's pretty well disguised to the casual glance against being
recognized as an adult type book.  I too thought it was a "joke" book and
purchased it for fun, however, in a recent issue of "Shanda the Panda" a
comic book for adults (because it contains adult themes, not because it's
"dirty") one of the characters, an anthropomorphized silk moth, promises to
help a fellow high school student when they go skinny dipping.  He's afraid
everyone will stare at his generous endowments.  She brings him a Kokigami
and calls it by that name.  So it must be a real thing, no?  This might be
a fun way to get a Significant Other interested in origami...<G>
----------------------------------------------------------------<*>---
kettir at           /\ /\   | "History shows again and again
geocities dot com  = o_o =  |  How Nature points up the folly of men."





From: Anine Cleve <anine20@USA.NET>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 07:57
Subject: Re: [Event At Sasuga in Mass.]

Hi!

I've now heard of fold-a-thons being held in both Japan and England. I th=
ink
it's a great idea, so have anyone heard of any fold-a-thons in Sweden? :)=

Anine

Vicky Avery <vavery@WENET.NET> wrote:

> --------------------------------------------- =

>       Attachment:=A0 =

>       MIME Type:=A0multipart/alternative =

> --------------------------------------------- =

I just heard about an interesting event for those of you near Cambridge.

Its a neat concept - a Fold-A-Thon that Sasuga bookstore in Cambridge MA =
is
having.  Its coming up on Sat. Oct. 23 from 10 to 6, and the participants=

will get sponsors to pledge for each crane that they fold.  This is a
benefit for the Jimmy Fund to help children with chronic and terminal
illnesses, and the cranes will be sent to Hiroshima Peace Park.  If you w=
ant
more information go to

http://www.sasugabooks.com/events/origamifoldathon.html

Vicky Mihara Avery

____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=3D=





From: Anine Cleve <anine20@USA.NET>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 08:20
Subject: Tanteidan????

Hello!

> The models I have listed are either
> included in the Tanteidan convention books or the Tanteidan magazines.

You are all talking about these books and magazines! Could someone please
explain to me what they are?
Thanks!

Anine

____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1





From: Lisa Hodsdon <Lisa_Hodsdon@HMCO.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 09:27
Subject: Complex vs. Intermediate folders [Was Re: Paper Diagrams]

As D'gou points out, the classes taught at OUSA Annual Convention
in New York are what they are because of who teaches. So look instead
at what classes get sold out. I have yet to be unable to get into a complex
class that I wanted. Granted, I've been blessed so far by reasonably low
numbers, but generally, there are still tickets available to most of the
complex classes even after ticketing is completed. Look at where people
clump to look at model menu. Granted, there are more models in the
middle, so there are more people there, but have you ever had trouble
getting to the fence to view the complex models? (Or the simple models,
for that matter?)

I *suspect* that we have a higher percentage of complex folders here
on the list than are in the OUSA membership. The Bell Curve in action.

Lisa
Lisa_Hodsdon@hmco.com





From: Foldmaster@AOL.COM
Date: 14 Oct 1999 10:10
Subject: Re: Tanteidan????

In a message dated 10/14/99 8:21:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, anine20@USA.NET
writes:

<< > The models I have listed are either
 > included in the Tanteidan convention books or the Tanteidan magazines.

 You are all talking about these books and magazines! Could someone please
 explain to me what they are?
 Thanks!
  >>

Dear Anine,

The following is a list of the books and magazines you are referring to
(partial list of models included):

Tanteidan's 4th Convention book (51 models, intermediate to complex, 192
pages, black & white soft cover)

Two modulars by Miyuki Kawamura (one a cherry blossom ball, beautiful!)
Two piece Pentagonal Box by Tomoko Fuse (one piece for lid, one for base)
Bird by Koshiro Hatori (simple lines with elegant results)
Peter Rabbit by Eiji Tsuchito (two pieces -- very good resemblance)
7 Var. Snowflakes by Kunio Suzuki (beautiful when folded from translucent
paper)
"Grey" the Alien by Shini Sasade (was misprinted: Glay the Arien  ha!ha!)
Train Tracks & Traffic Signal by Ichiro Kinoshita
Centaur by Fumiaki Kawahata
Kingfisher by Hideo Komatsu
Pegasus & Locust by Seiji Nishikawa
Northrop F-5E Tiger II by Yoshihisa Kimura
Harrier by Issei Yoshino
Flasher Supreme, Flasher Supreme II, Frog's Tongue & Man's Suit by Jeremy
Shafer Other outstanding models by creator's I can't read:  horse,
moose/reindeer, Shiva goddess, witch on broomstick (one piece), etc.

Tanteidan 5th Convention book (63 models, intermediate to complex, 256 pages,
Black & white softcover)

Chrysanthemum by Hiroaki Takai (simple modular flower with effective results)
Sports Car by Ryo Aoki
Case Crab by Yoshihisa Kimura (clever two pc model with small box for body)
Caterpillar by Hideo Komatsu
"Twister" by Miyuki Kawamura (30 pc modular star)
Spiral Box by Tomoko Fuse (4pc lid and 4pc base cut from A4 sized paper)
Nishiki Koi (Japanese Carp) by Go Kinoshita (color change to create spots on
back)
A number of dinosaurs, dragons and mythical creators by various Japanese
creators

Models by foreign creators:
Vase "Duet" by Yurii Shumakov (decorative vase with two holes for flowers)
Clown by Yurii & Katrin Shumakov (3D 5pc modular fits together without glue)
Oleander by Katrin Shumakov (1 or 2 pc flowers with leaf & stem assembly)
Edelweiss by Katrin Shumakov (multi piece flower with leaf & stalk assembly)
Seagull, Butterfly, Flapping Butterfly, Boomerang, Seashell & Cobra by David
Derudas (the boomerang really flies!, cobra on display was remarkable)
$ Pyramid and Balancing $ Eagle by Jeremy Shafer ($ eagle balances on $
pyramid)
Ostrich, Anteater and Alligator by Peter Budai
"Fluffy" by Marc Kirschenbaum (cute 3-D teddy bear model)

Here's a partial list of contents from Mr. Yamaguchi's "Joyful Life With
Origami" which is 200 pages long,  has color photographs and over 50 simple
to high intermediate models diagrammed:

The book is divided into six parts:

    TABLE SENSE - 8 groupings (napkin folds, bowls, chopstick holders, candy
dishes, bottletop decorations, etc.)

    GREETINGS & GIFTS - 8 groupings (gift boxes, noshi envelopes, bottle neck
wraps, letterfolds, gift cards, shopping bag & cardholder)

    SMALL ITEMS & ACCESSORIES - 4 groupings (wallets, photo stand, tissue
case, brooch & earrings, barrette)

    INTERIOR DECORATION - 6 groupings (flower arrangements, mobile, namecard,
lampshade, vase)

    HOME PARTY FUN - 4 groupings (table settings, napkin rings, fish game,
party games)

    SEASONAL EVENTS - 7 groupings (New year's decorations, Kabuki lion
dancers, Hina dolls, tanabata steamers, various Christmas ornaments)

The cost of the books are:

        Tanteidan 4th Convention book       $22.00
        Tanteidan 5th Convention book       $28.00
        Yamaguchi's book                    $19.00

Cost of the books includes shipping to overseas addresses.

Also available is membership to JOAS (Japan Origami Academic Society)
bi-monthly publication.  This magazine has a full color photo on the front
page, clear diagrams of models (intermediate to complex level) as well as
various articles and columns in Japanese.  The six issues/year membership
cost is $40.00/year.

The following information is required for their application form:

Full name
Mailing address
Telephone/Fax Nos.
E-mail address
Date of birth
Sex
Occupation
Hobbies

Please let me know if you are interested in any of the books and give me your
mailing address (and other details if interested in ordering JOAS
membership).  I will add your order to others and mail to Mr. Yamaguchi later
this month.

Sincerely yours,

June Sakamoto
9 Merrill Drive
Mahwah, NJ  07430

PS:  I can accept US personal checks, money orders, int'l postal money
orders, bank drafts, etc. in US currency.





From: Robby/Laura <morassi@ZEN.IT>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 10:37
Subject: Bibliography on Flexagons

Hi all !

For those interested in knowing more about flexagons: the Bibliography of
Recreational Mathematics by William Schaaf (National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics) gives several refs. to books and to articles on various
Mathematics Journals. I've collected all these in a small text file which
you can download from:

http://www.zen.it/~morassi/pics/flexagon.txt

Hope this helps.
Roberto





From: Robby/Laura <morassi@ZEN.IT>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 10:37
Subject: Re: Australian folds

Nick, you nasty boy !
At 17.26 12/10/1999 +0100, you wrote:

>Sorry, members of what? The BOS?  Why should BOS members need any
>decoration? They are mostly fine specimens - ask Penny...

Penny ? Why Penny ? Oh, dear me..... <8-O

Roberto





From: Robby/Laura <morassi@ZEN.IT>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 10:37
Subject: Re: Australian folds

David,
At 08.42 12/10/1999 -0700, you wrote:

>Anyway there needs to be more flower books!  I know that James Sakado wrote
>one but are there others?

Yes. In Italian, one by Nilva Pillan and another by Guido Gazzera. Both
published by IL CASTELLO (Milan). Guaranteed true flowers, no KOKI....

Roberto





From: Sandra P Hoffman <ghidra@CONSCOOP.OTTAWA.ON.CA>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 10:54
Subject: Book recomendation criteria was Re: Newcomer and Question

On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, david whitbeck wrote:

> Okay!   You're right.  I like Origami Fantasy more than Prehistoric Origami
> because well:
>
> 1. the models in Prehistoric Origami are a joke.  They're mostly two
> dimensional and very boxy.  They're like volvo dinosaurs.  Even the ever
> popular stegosaurus is flat and doesn't even have a back.  The Triceratops
> merely okay and the rest of the book has no challenge or oomf to it.

It's always good to know what people are basing their recomendations on.
For instance, I like to put origami on home made special occasion cards.
It's hard to find nice looking flat models on themes other than flowers or
butterflies. I now know to look at Prehistoric Origami to see if it might
be useful for this purpose. Challenge or oomf is also not necessarily what
I am always looking for. I enjoy simple folds, especially if they do
something elegant and surprising. Montroll's Moat Monster in Teach
Yourself Origami comes to mind. It's no great shakes as a finished model,
nice but nothing special, but the first time I folded it and saw how such
a simple set of folds was going to produce the three heads, I was
immensely pleased with it. I often fold it when I get some new paper I
have not used before, just to remember that pleasure and to see how the
paper folds.

>
> 2. The Origami Fantasy models are 3d and breath life and are intricate in
> detail.  It might cost alot but the models are so hard and time consuming
> to fold that it's worthy the money in my opinion.

I calculate origami value for the money differently. I like a variety of
simple and complex folds in a book, and almost always the satisfaction I
get from a folding a model has nothing to do with it's level of complexity
or realism. The best value I have had for my origami money this past year
is Origami Plain and Simple. Models by Robert Neale and text by Thomas
Hull. I've had fun with a lot of the folds in it, but the reason for it
being considered the best value for my money this year rests on one model.
The Elephantis Abstractum, a 7 step model, done in plain grey paper is
simply the most beautiful and satisfying origami model I have ever folded.
It is one of the few models I keep around for the pleasure of looking at
it. Most models hold no interest for me once I am done folding them.

I know I've strayed from the original question somewhat, and hope my
comments are not taken as criticism. They are not meant to be. I am
very pleased to see people talking about the criteria they use
when choosing books for themselves, and recomending books to others.

sph

Sandra P. Hoffman ghidra@conscoop.ottawa.on.ca
http://www.flora.org/sandra/
----------------------------
The one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due,
not a garden swollen to a realm;
his own hands to use,
not the hands of others to command. --Sam Gamgee





From: "JacAlArt ." <jacalart@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 12:17
Subject: Diagrams in new Tanteidan issue #57

Cool! Just got my new Tanteidan newsletter today! What a diverse collection
of diagrams! A 2 piece twist box for those who prefer simpler modulars. An
easy flower, for those into vegetation. And a complex Triceratops with toes
by Kawahata -- for those of us unhappy with The Paper! (Only 10 pages and
105 steps.)Also -- an interesting article by or about Robert Lang dealing
with geometry and divisons of paper. Sure wish it was in English as I can't
read Japanese. Too bad some English language publication doesn't have enough
pages for an article like this. Guess more people wanted to hear about
someone's lunch with Tomoko Fuse.

~JacAlArt

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





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 12:39
Subject: Re: Book recomendation criteria was Re: Newcomer and Question

I just wanted to say Sandra that my criterion is not merely complexity and
three dimensionality in folds (well I admit that's most of it) but also I
want them to be beautiful and have an aesthetically pleasing folding
sequence.  I don't terribly like the diagrams where the first step is a
horrible collapse.  My favorite fold is not even a complex one, or even
high intermediate: the Kawasaki Shell is my favorite.  It might not be
terribly hard to fold but I always get a kick out of folding it.

David





From: "Askinazi, Brett" <brett@HAGERHINGE.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 12:42
Subject: Re: Diagrams in new Tanteidan issue #57

Wow you had lunch with Tomoko Fuse?

Brett

 Guess more people wanted to hear about
someone's lunch with Tomoko Fuse.

~JacAlArt





From: "Askinazi, Brett" <brett@HAGERHINGE.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 12:49
Subject: Re: Tanteidan????

Ok the Tanteidan is an Origami Club/organization based in Japan.  They
publish a newsletter, and annually have a convention.  The convention
produces an annual of model diagrams that were displayed/taught at that
years convention.

The annual is published in Japanese, but the diagrams (in most cases *cough*
Gamera *cough*) are very clear and concise.  It is a much sought after book,
I buy them all.  The annuals are DIVERSE ranging from simple to insanely
complex.  The subject matter is also very diverse and offers something for
everyone.

I highly recommend the Tanteidan annuals.  They usually can be purchased
from www.sasugabooks.com also *sometimes* members from the list will take
orders.

I'm not sure how you can hook-up with the newsletter though.  Someone else
can elaborate on that maybe.

Brett

You are all talking about these books and magazines! Could someone please
explain to me what they are?
Thanks!

Anine





From: Rob Hudson <FashFold@AOL.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 13:29
Subject: Amazing origami story

Lunch with Fuse?  I  can top that.

One time Akira Yoshizawa came to my house to use the bathroom.'





From: Kenny1414@AOL.COM
Date: 14 Oct 1999 13:54
Subject: [NO] Re: "Kokigami"

In a message dated 10/14/1999 7:21:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kettir writes:

> in a recent issue of "Shanda the Panda" a
>  comic book for adults (because it contains adult themes, not because it's
>  "dirty")
<snip>
>  She brings him a Kokigami
>  and calls it by that name.  So it must be a real thing, no?

Sorry, kettir, but I don't think so. It's more likely the comic book author
has seen the book. I'm pretty sure Kokigami is an invented name for an
imaginary traditional craft. Pure fantasy, like the invented history of
Tangrams and the mythical Seven Books of Tan.

But if you were interested in inventing some folds to go along with the
joke, why not?

Aloha,
Kenneth Kawamura





From: Carrie Marcey <carrola@DELLNET.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 13:58
Subject: new member

Hi!  My name is Carrie Marcey and I just subscribed to the origami list.  I
     wanted to join this list because at the suggestion of Eric Andersen.  He
     suggested I join because I am researching for my senior seminar at High
     Point University and my topic is o





From: John Marcolina <jmarcoli@CISCO.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 14:06
Subject: Web Page Update

I have updated my webpage with a couple of new pictures: a Satyr model from
     "Monstruos De Papel", and a surfboard model from "Folding California" (you
     had to look quick to spot them). I also give a short discussion about
     backcoating, then link to Mette Pe

As always, comments are welcome.

Joseph, when you get a chance, could you please add a link to my page in your
     master list?

Thanks!

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





From: "Askinazi, Brett" <brett@HAGERHINGE.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 15:16
Subject: Re: [NO] Re: "Kokigami"

I have seen references to Kokigami outside of the jokingly created cut out
book.  I wonder if one of those sex experts/resarchers l have done any
investigating.

Brett

-----Original Message-----
From: Kenny1414@AOL.COM [mailto:Kenny1414@AOL.COM]

 Sorry, kettir, but I don't think so. It's more likely the comic book author
has seen the book. I'm pretty sure Kokigami is an invented name for an
imaginary traditional craft. Pure fantasy, like the invented history of
Tangrams and the mythical Seven Books of Tan.

But if you were interested in inventing some folds to go along with the
joke, why not?

Aloha,
Kenneth Kawamura





From: Tiffany Tam <origamiwing@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 15:32
Subject: Re: The Paper (Am I Alone In This?)

oes all the members of OUSA recieves a copy of THE PAPER? I joined the club
this year but i haven't received any new copies since the fist time they
sent me the package.

>From: Jake Crowley <jakecrow@HOTMAIL.COM>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: The Paper (Am I Alone In This?)
>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:33:32 PDT
>
>No, you are definitely not alone, I used to be a member of OUSA, but just
>let my membership expire, partly because of The Paper. I have to agree with
>you, it needs more complex diagrams, harder models, something nice-looking.
>I aws also displeased with the service from OUSA (waiting a month for an
>order to come gets annoying), but if The Paper had some good models in it,
>maybe I would have remained a member. I dont think i could say it any
>better
>that you already have so I wont try :)
>
>Jake Crowley
>jakecrow@hotmail.com
>
>
>>From: "JacAlArt ." <jacalart@HOTMAIL.COM>
>>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>>Subject: The Paper (Am I Alone In This?)
>>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 19:07:58 EDT
>>
>>Once again, I'll probably piss off a bunch of people here -- but that's
>>okay. I just want to know if anyone else shares my feelings.
>>
>>I was looking forward to receiving my new issue of The Paper now that Marc
>>K. is editing diagrams. (I love his stuff!) But once again, I was
>>extremely
>>dissapointed with the diagrams. Both pieces were modular (or 'multi-piece'
>>for those of you so hung up on the definition of 'modular'). There were
>>great photos in the beginning. Why not have diagrams for those?! Lang's
>>Moose, Joisel's Pangolin, Mask, Sea Horse, Snail, or non-pictured
>>Tortoise?
>>I know these particular models may not be diagrammed yet -- but what about
>>including more challenging models?! (Wasn't Joisel's Rat in a recent issue
>>of BOS?) A Chris Palmer tesselation? A Joseph Wu creation? Something by
>>Marc
>>K or Jeremy S? One of the thousand diagrams published in French or
>>Japanese
>>publications? Does OUSA actively scout and recruit diagrams -- or do they
>>just take whatever comes in?
>>
>>I fold for fun -- for the challenge -- not physical therapy. Yes yes yes.
>>Simple models can be beautiful and challenging. We've all heard the rant.
>>Look at David D's Cobra. Simple! Only about 10 steps -- but tough to do
>>well. But why does OUSA consistently ignore technically challenging
>>models?!
>>
>>Does anybody else out there prefer traditional (excuse me -- pure)
>>origami?
>>I mean a single uncut square (and a bit more challenging than a Candy
>>Dish?!)
>>
>>Let's look at the last 10 issues of The Paper. Out of the 27 models, only
>>one was rated as complex. Marc K's Chessboard. There were, of course, 5
>>modulars and a pureland. I don't believe a model must be complex to be
>>good
>>-- but come on here! Does anyone else feel unfulfilled with The Paper? I
>>am
>>always pleased with my issue of BARF. I loved the ORU 'magazines' and
>>still
>>enjoy my Tanteidan newsletters. Sadly, Robert Lang doesn't come out with a
>>book-a-month. (Too bad. I loved folding his Organist from the latest OUSA
>>Convention Annual.)
>>
>>That's my rant. Just re-thinking any membership renewal. Anyone else?
>>
>>(Just a note to those I've offended. Relax! This is just my opinion. It's
>>only paper. Don't take it so personally!)
>>
>>~Jac
>>
>>______________________________________________________
>>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>

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





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 15:32
Subject: Re: Newcomer and Question

At 09:49 99/10/13 -0700, you wrote:
>Okay!   You're right.  I like Origami Fantasy more than Prehistoric Origami
>because well:
>
>1. the models in Prehistoric Origami are a joke.  They're mostly two
>dimensional and very boxy.  They're like volvo dinosaurs.  Even the ever
>popular stegosaurus is flat and doesn't even have a back.  The Triceratops
>merely okay and the rest of the book has no challenge or oomf to it.

No, they are not. They represent a particular period in the development of
origami, and are valuable in and of themselves, both technically and
aesthetically. I agree with you: I like Kawahata's models better, too. But
to dump on Montroll's work because it is different is very narrow-minded.
Think first about motivation. Why were the models created? Kawahata wanted
to present "realistic" models. Montroll chose to produce models that were
recognisible but also foldable by more people. You (and I) might prefer
Kawahata's models, but Montroll's also have a place. Besides, try taking a
look at Kawahata's "Dinosaur Origami 1" and "Dinosaur Origami 2" books.
You'll find many similarities between the models in those books and the
models in Montroll's book.

>2. The Origami Fantasy models are 3d and breath life and are intricate in
>detail.  It might cost alot but the models are so hard and time consuming
>to fold that it's worthy the money in my opinion.

Indeed, I had the pleasure of hosting Kawahata-san at my house a couple of
days ago. As we talked about his work, he emphasized that all of his
designs, both the simpler ones and the more complex ones, are important to
him. Even the failures taught him something. He mentioned his styracosaurus
(looks like a triceratops, but has spikes all along the frill). He designed
it first as a two-piece model. It was published as such in one of the
"Dinosaur Origami" books. Later, he developed it into the one-piece model
that appears in "Origami Fantasy". His latest pteranodon is his fourth
design, and it was fascinating to see the way his motives and design
strategies changed over time.

>I would never think that comparing those two books is like comparing
>Beethoven and Mozart.  Prehistoric Origami is not that good.

Okay, how about a better analogy: comparing Picasso to Rembrant. C'mon,
David. Open your mind a little.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t: 604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331  e: josephwu@ultranet.ca
w: http://www.origami.vancouver.bc.ca





From: Penny Groom <penny.groom@BTINTERNET.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 16:11
Subject: Re: Australian folds

In article <3.0.6.16.19991013202211.28c7ab86@zen.zen.it>, Robby/Laura
<morassi@ZEN.IT> writes
>Nick, you nasty boy !
>At 17.26 12/10/1999 +0100, you wrote:
>
>>Sorry, members of what? The BOS?  Why should BOS members need any
>>decoration? They are mostly fine specimens - ask Penny...
>
>Penny ? Why Penny ? Oh, dear me..... <8-O
He thinks I'm more worldy wise than I am, just humour him!

All the best

Penny
Penny Groom               penny.groom@btinternet.com
Membership Secretary, British Origami Society
BOS Homepage
http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/





From: Leigh Halford <Leigh451@AOL.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 16:24
Subject: paper supplies

Does anybody know where I can get decent sized (30cm+) foil, rather than the
piddly little 15cm squares I can get at my local shop, in dear old England.
Before anybody suggests cutting it myself I am useless at cutting squares!!
Ta





From: Scott Cramer <scram@LANDMARKNET.NET>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 16:32
Subject: Re: paper supplies

Leigh asked:

>Does anybody know where I can get decent sized (30cm+) foil

    You can get 25cm squares from OUSA, both Japanese (very thin) and
American (heavier). I'd be interested to learn where I could find anything
larger, too...

Scott scram@landmarknet.net
Littleton, NH USA





From: Penny Groom <penny.groom@BTINTERNET.COM>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 16:52
Subject: Re: paper supplies

In article <0.5810e40f.2537953c@aol.com>, Leigh Halford
<Leigh451@AOL.COM> writes
>Does anybody know where I can get decent sized (30cm+) foil, rather than the
>piddly little 15cm squares I can get at my local shop, in dear old England.
>Before anybody suggests cutting it myself I am useless at cutting squares!!
Buy a paper cutter( guillotine) you can get them in Office World or
other stationery shops, then it doesn't matter about your cutting
skills.
>
All the best

penny

Penny Groom
Membership Secretary, British Origami Society
BOS Homepage
http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/
