




From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 08:18
Subject: Why "I can't do _that_"?? (was Re: Converting Newcomers to origami

Michael Janssen-Gibson wrote:
+folding group meetings were made). Most interest has come from the
+children of co-workers, who hear about the models I make and want to
+see/learn. Am I coming across some of that "adults think everything is too
+hard" syndrome Doug mentioned in a recent post?.

There is another syndrome too (This also has been discussed previously
and the archives should have more details), which is that not all who
appreciate origami (or any other craft/art/whatever-it-is) have any
desire to make it themselves. Speaking only personally, there is a
tendency to want to share one's enthusiasm for the creating aspects. If
So-and-so likes this stuff, they might like to make it too. Depending
on how an offer to teach So-and-so origami is made, it seems that a
common mode of response is a self deprecating "I _couldn't_ do that" or
"I _don't_ have the patience" or ... but my opinion is that most of the
time what is really meant is more like "I enjoyed looking at it, but
have no interest in producing it" and for whatever social reasons, that
gets translated into something like the excuses I just quoted.

That is just my opinion. Right or wrong, it has had one side effect,
which is to make me a lot less frustrated when dealing with those
situations, and I figure(I hope!) that has to help a lot in actually
planting the thought that maybe they _could_ do it themselves.

As for children... children are generally as less masked in their
interactions and tend to be direct about what they like, don't like,
want, etc., so again, IMHO, they are less likely to "make nice" and say
something about a model if they aren't interested, and they are
(hopefully) not yet so socialized as to think they can't do something
interesting/hard/complicated (and might be aided by a complete or
underdeveloped lack of ability to assess such things anyways.  ;-) ).

-D'gou





From: Robby/Laura <morassi@ZEN.IT>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 10:04
Subject: Re: [NO] Paint doesn't do it for me

Donna,
At 00.29 20/10/1999 +0100, you wrote:

>I will look into Paintshop Pro as an option, but I think it may be a case
of overkill for what I want. And I believe the registration fee for the
shareware is quite high. Version 6 was 99 dollars.

I strongly suggest to download LViewPro v.1.D2, from its website:

http://www.lview.com

It's a fully functional shareware (about $30), very compact (the executable
is only 500 kbytes), fast and friendly. You can crop, save, resize, modify,
retouch, change color depth, capture from screen, acquire from scanner or
external sources, create slideshows..... nearly anything. Excellent and
worth every cent !

Roberto





From: Howard Portugal <howardp@FAST.NET>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 11:03
Subject: Re: Wet behind the ears

The "Scuba" equipment had me rolling ...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Origami Mailing List [mailto:Origami@MIT.Edu]On Behalf Of Joseph
> Wu
> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 9:26 PM
> To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: Wet behind the ears
>
>
> At 20:21 99/10/20 -0700, David Whitbeck wrote:
> >I think that you're misleading Rob Kim!
>
> Actually, David, Kim was just pulling Rob's (and all of our) leg. Note the
> last sentence in his message...
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 11:19
Subject: Re: The price of technical virtuosity

Dave Mitchell wrote:

> I believe this is the fundamental reason why his models turn out as they do.
> By choosing the result in advance and striving to achieve it the designer
> ends up fighting with the paper. This always shows.

I strongly disagree. Had you not said 'Always' I would probably not have had
any such reaction. It is certainly the case that the initial paper shape
determines the geometries which will "flow" and those which won't. It is for
precisely this reason that I find the "everything must be done from a square"
camp to be so distorted. As an example, one of my favorite subjects for
origmai is snowflakes. They have a six-fold symmetry. Horrors! But, but, a
square only has four fold symmetry (or multiples there of). Making a snowflake
from a single uncut square results in "fighting" with the paper, which for
this example usually results in areas of differing thicknesses. However it
does not follow that making a snowflake from a single uncut hexagon will fight
the paper in the slightest.

If one were to follow your argument to its next logical step, one would then
say that the "best" (or most beautiful) design strategies do not fight the
paper, and as such, the _only_ way to "design" models without that struggle is
by mere experimentation or, as its often called, doodling. Fold the paper
around and see what happens. If it kinda looks like a giraffe, call it one. Is
that what you're advocating? If not, how is what you're advocating different?

Simply because Kawahata (for example) has found a particular construction
attractive/desirable/beautiful for use in a particular model does _not_ a
priori make it fighting with the paper.

> What I was trying to counter was the growing tendency for folk on this list
> to believe that technical virtuosity equals excellence. This is simply not
> true.

Now that I can agree with! ;-)

-D'gou





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 11:40
Subject: Re: Thoki Yenns's Abstract Form

>Clare,
>
>If you turn Thoki's model over 45 degrees, you get an iceberg.
>
>Such riches from four folds!
>
>Dorothy, the recently shaken (magnitude 7.1 earthquake) and currently
>baked (99 degree desert winds) and always humble folder

I love how now everyone is trying to turn the abstract form into something
concrete, it seems to inspire the imagination!

David





From: Sandra P Hoffman <ghidra@CONSCOOP.OTTAWA.ON.CA>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 12:05
Subject: Re: Converting Newcomers to origami (was: Re: The Price of Technical

On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Michael Janssen-Gibson wrote:
>
> The question is often posed to this list "how did you become interested in
> origami?" - would it be a fair assumption that most people become
> interested at a younger age, maybe/maybe not put it aside for a number of
> years, and returned with a passion at a later date? I would be happy to
> hear contrary stories.

I was always told as a child that I could not do anything that required
handiness or dexterity. Manual tasks, other than the serious gruntwork
type housework were routinely and systematically denied me. This happened
both at home and at school. If I were ever given paper to fold at school
(I doubt it but don't remember everything) It would have been with the
attitude that "well everyone else is doing it so you have to have some to
try, but we don't expect you to actually be able to do it."

By the time I had children of my own, I had learned to cook and to sew my
own designer clothes. Both of these fell into the category of things the
adults around me had told me that I could not ever possibly learn how to
do. So I was into serious questioning of all that I had been told I could
not do. Trying things out to ammuse my children was a safe way of figuring
out what I could and could not do. If it didn't work, well it was just
child's play and not worth worrying about.

My first attempts at using paper to amuse children was freehand cutouts.
When I was going out places with my children where there wouldn't be much
for children to do, I would take some coloured sheets of construction or
photocopying paper and a pair of scissors. I would get the children to ask
me to cut them out an animal shape, and then I would freehand cut it. I
was pretty good actually pretty good. I discovered that if I
visualized the animal for a few minutes that my memory gave me the
important features that made that animal recognizable. The children would
ooh and ahh and run away to play with their animals for awhile.

Origami was the next step from this. The freehand animal cut outs had no
history as far as I knew then, but origami does have history and
precedents and so was riskier for me. There was noone and nothing to
measure my animal cutouts against, but I could definitely "fail" at
origami. Nevertheless, I picked up a copy of Origami for Parties by Kazuo
Kobayashi and Makoto Yamaguchi and folded the paper cup, brilliantly, the
first time. I was thrilled. That would have been somewhen around 9 years
ago. Does this sound silly? As a child I had trouble folding a fortune
teller/cootie catcher. Something all the other children could do with
ease.

When my children were younger, I didn't have a lot of time for folding. I
also have had very limited access to books and nice paper untill the last
year or so. I have no pretentions that I will ever be a brilliant folder,
but what started as a means to amuse my children and challenge the
"truths" of my childhood, has become for me a very satisfying and healing
part of my life. As my children have grown, my time available for folding
has grown, and so has my love for the process of folding paper.

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: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 12:59
Subject: Re: The price of technical virtuosity

At 11:22 99/10/21 +0100, Dave Mitchell wrote:
>Thanks Joseph. I had suspected this - but it's good to have it confirmed. I
>believe this is the fundamental reason why his models turn out as they do.
>By choosing the result in advance and striving to achieve it the designer
>ends up fighting with the paper. This always shows.

Doug has already addressed this issue. I would have to agree with him.
Methinks that in your desire to steer clear of the myopic view that
technical virtuosity equals excellence, you have firmly placed yourself into
the equally myopic view that technical virtuosity equals ugliness.

Look at the work, and learn what you can of the artist's motivations. If he
has achieved his goal in some measure, then it is a successful piece and has
at least some measure of inherent beauty. Taking your comments into other
realms of art, you have excluded any sort of representational art
(portraiture, landscapes, busts, etc.) because they are all based on
choosing the result in advance and striving to achieve it. Does that then
mean that the artists are fighting with their media? I think not. Rather,
the artists are working with their media, shaping it to their vision, but
also respecting the limitations of the media. It is a balance, and balance
is often more beautiful than domination (whether by the artist or by the
medium).

>Is it? Haven't you just confirmed that in fact his intention is to produce
>models which possess certain specified technical features? In origami these
>two things are almost always mutually incompatible.

No, I did not say that. Art is always about abstraction. As Marc
Kirschenbaum said, if he wanted a realistic dog, he'd just buy a dog and be
done with it. To represent a subject in any medium, it is necessary to
abstract out certain features and focus on those. The extreme form of this
would be caricature, but it is no less true in other forms of art. THAT is
what Kawahata is doing. His desire is to create a representation of a
creature (and probably a beautiful representation at that) and the specified
features are an abstraction (a distillation) of what he thinks are the key
features that bring out the character of that creature. There is nothing
"technical" about this process. The technical part comes after the
abstraction has already taken place, which is working with the paper to try
to bring his vision to "life".

>It's also worth pointing out that what I said was that - to me personally -
>his models are ugly. I said nothing about them not being art. It is possible
>to design for ugliness just as it is possible to design for beauty - though
>it seems that Kawahata is doing neither of these things.

Kawahata strikes me as being a talented man, both technically and
artistically. If his sole desire was to solve technical problems, he
probably would not bother with origami. He told me at length about his work
at Toyota, designing advanced braking systems for next generation vehicles.
He seems to derive a great deal of satisfaction from his work. Why then does
he do origami? I believe that it is to fulfill his artistic needs, within a
medium that he can excel in. Given that premise, I think that it would be
wrong to say that beauty is not one of his goals in designing origami.

>A misinterpretation. Saying something is ugly is not at all the same as
>flaying it. I didn't say it was poor, bad, awful or worthless origami. In
>fact, as Joseph Wu has confirmed, it's experimental design work. This has to
>be good for origami. The thing is to get it in context and to understand
>what and why it is - if we can.

Again, no. I did not say that it is "experimental design work". I said that
he does very little experimentation in terms of coming up with new folding
methods and structures. His genius lies in learning techniques from others
and then using them in new ways to create his creatures.

>What I was trying to counter was the growing tendency for folk on this list
>to believe that technical virtuosity equals excellence. This is simply not
>true.

And, as Doug said, that is something I can heartily agree with.

----------------------------------------------------------------
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: "Lori Gregory." <LBGregory@AOL.COM>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 13:11
Subject: 5-point Star

Can anyone help this person with the 5-point star?  Please respond to him
directly and his address is JMCDONALL@aol.com.  Thank you.

(This message was forwarded to me from another teacher at his school.)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim McDonald
> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 2:37 PM
> To:   LWES
> Subject:  Help!!!!!!
>
> Dear Staff,
>   My 8th grade son has a history packet due and we are having trouble
> with one step.
> Does anyone know how to produce a five-point star by folding and making
> one cut? If so, E-mail me at A.S.A.P.
>
> Jim Mc





From: Anine Cleve <anine20@USA.NET>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 13:22
Subject: Stretched bird base HELP!

Hi!

I was wondering if anyone could give me some details on how to make a
stretched bird base? For example I wonder how to make the folds in the right
places... but just details about making the whole base is welcome!
Hope to hear from you soon!

Anine

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





From: Robby/Laura <morassi@ZEN.IT>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 13:27
Subject: Re: Thoki Yenns's Abstract Form

Dear Thoki,

Claire wrote:

>Did you realise that if you turn your model over 90 degrees, you have a
>dynamic model of a sail boat leaning into the wind

and Dorothy added:

If you turn Thoki's model over 45 degrees, you get an iceberg.

-------------------------------

Encouraged by these suggestions, I turned your model over 180 degrees, then
180 degrees again. I'm sorry to say that the result wasn't any real
improvement over the original model, nor did it remind anything else which
was not implied in the model itself. Is it my lack of imagination, or have
I done something wrong ?

Roberto





From: David Whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 14:04
Subject: Re: The price of technical virtuosity

Another question is this whole thread was originally based on attacking
people who value pushing the limits of what they can achieve whether than
concentrating on creating beautiful models.  But are there such people?
Are there models that were created as a technical challenge but is quite
ugly and excessive in detail?  It seems to me that there is no one that I
can think of that has lost sight of making a good model.  Not even the
pictures of Meguro's works seem to be an exercise in pushing the limits.
His crabs, insects, that sea urchin are all beautiful as well as complex.
So my question is are we discussing the merits of an illusion?  Who are
these fabled technical virtuousos?

David





From: Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 15:21
Subject: The sticky-outs vs. the paper-ballets

Hey folks, the debate about technical virtuosity and paper ballets is
really interesting. Keep it up, and never mind the rest of us, sitting
back in our comfy sofas and enjoying the show :-).

Matthias "I can't dance" Gutfeldt





From: Anine Cleve <anine20@USA.NET>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 17:53
Subject: Folding a Rhino!

Hi again everybody!

I'm folding a rhino from someone's page (sorry, forgot whose) and I have a
problem with step 11-12. Here's the URL:

Page 1:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/4800/d_rhino1.gif
Page 2: where my problem pops up
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/4800/d_rhino2.gif
Page 3:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/4800/d_rhino3.gif

My problem is that I can't make the model look like in step 12. I'm not sure
what to slide out, also can't figure out how to slide something out without
changing the angle on the back (hope you know what I mean).
Any help would be appreciated!

Anine

PS. Thanks to Julia for helping with the birdbase.. I couldn't use your tip in
this model (you'll see why on the diagram) but you made me try once again and
suddenly I remembered how to do it! Thanks!

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





From: Dr Stephen O'Hanlon <fishgoth@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 18:25
Subject: Re: Folding a Rhino!

>Hi again everybody!
>
>I'm folding a rhino from someone's page (sorry, forgot whose) and I have a
>problem with step 11-12. My problem is that I can't make the model look
>like in step 12. I'm not sure
>what to slide out, also can't figure out how to slide something out without
>changing the angle on the back (hope you know what I mean).
>Any help would be appreciated!

Ho Hum. Seeing as it's my design, I suppose I ought to try and help...

This is one of those folds thats difficult to diagram, and is a combination
of lazy design and a lack of arrows that can describe it. Basically, the
line A-b lies on a flap _inside_ the model. Pull it out, without making any
creases and line it up alone line C-D. Then press the model flat with your
fingers. This will create either one or two valley folds inside the model,
and sometimes a squash fold depending on how you folded the back.
Essentially, you are trying to create two flaps that form the back legs.

I may try to re-draw these diagrams with a better sequence for the legs at
some distant point in the future...but pigs will probably fly before then (
and Im not talking about Joseph Wu's model...)

By the way, the names O'Hanlon, Dr Stephen O'Hanlon...and its MY page ;-)

Stephen

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





From: Dan Gries <dangries@MATH.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 18:27
Subject: newbie hello and request

hello, i used to be a memebr of this list, but that was a while ago now.
i have been folding quite a bit lately and now feel like reaching out
and becoming part of the origami community.  i've been folding since i
was a wee lad, and i think i'm at an expert level now.  i've created only
a handful of models, though.  but some are nice.

one reason i write now is because i am looking for a particular model:
i would like to find a model of a koi - the small, japanese carp.  has
anyone ever seen such a model?  i have seen several carp models listed
at the OUSA database, but don't know how much they look like koi.  also,
one koi model is listed there, by a folder named LaFosse, but i don't
understand what publication this is in.

in any case, let me know if you know of such a model.

-dan in ohio.





From: Rob Hudson <FashFold@AOL.COM>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 19:28
Subject: Re: Wet behind the ears

Aww, Joseph!! Why do you always have to spill the beans on the jokes??





From: Stephen Canon <Stephen_Canon@BROWN.EDU>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 19:59
Subject: Re: Question about Map Folding

Here's a quickly thrown together page showing how to perform the
required fold - i.e. so that adjacent sections of the map are only 1
fold away.

http://members.xoom.com/_XOOM/squidmeat/Origami/map.html

I think that this is the fold that Tom Hull was describing, no?

-Stephen Canon





From: "Katherine J. Meyer" <kathy@SILENTWORLD.COM>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 20:01
Subject: Re: Converting Newcomers to origami/become interested

It took me 38 years to discover origami. Saw a mobile of origami models in a
craft store, then went home and learned more about it via the Internet. Made a
crane, and I was hooked!!!!

Kathy  <*))))><

> On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Michael Janssen-Gibson wrote:
>
> The question is often posed to this list "how did you become interested in
> origami?" - would it be a fair assumption that most people become
> interested at a younger age, maybe/maybe not put it aside for a number of
> years, and returned with a passion at a later date? I would be happy to hear
> contrary stories.





From: Papa Joe <papajoe@CHORUS.NET>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 20:37
Subject: $ bill viking Helmet

I need some help.

I Just came up with a $bill Viking helmet but........

I know this model has been done by someone before
(forget who just saw mention of it in the archives).

My question is has anyone seen that model?
Or does anyone know who made it.
I need to know if I re-invented wheel or not.

Thanks, Joe

Papajoe@chorus.net





From: Mike and/or Janet Hamilton <mikeinnj@CONCENTRIC.NET>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 21:09
Subject: Re: newbie hello and request

Dan,

Here is a link to Michael LaFosse's Origamido website page about his
"Origami Sea Turtle and Koi" video:

http://www.origamido.com/animals/stkoivid/skoivd.html

Janet

----- Original Message -----
From: Dan Gries <dangries@MATH.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
To: <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 1999 6:16 PM
Subject: newbie hello and request

> hello, i used to be a memebr of this list, but that was a while ago now.
> i have been folding quite a bit lately and now feel like reaching out
> and becoming part of the origami community.  i've been folding since i
> was a wee lad, and i think i'm at an expert level now.  i've created only
> a handful of models, though.  but some are nice.
>
> one reason i write now is because i am looking for a particular model:
> i would like to find a model of a koi - the small, japanese carp.  has
> anyone ever seen such a model?  i have seen several carp models listed
> at the OUSA database, but don't know how much they look like koi.  also,
> one koi model is listed there, by a folder named LaFosse, but i don't
> understand what publication this is in.
>
> in any case, let me know if you know of such a model.
>
> -dan in ohio.





From: Papa Joe <papajoe@CHORUS.NET>
Date: 21 Oct 1999 22:32
Subject: $ Viking Helmet

I went through the old archives and found the origonal post about the Viking
Helmet....

origonal below------------------------

> From: makaala647@aol.com
> Subject: Hi I'm new
>
> I got into magic awhile back and joined the international brotherhood of
> magicians (we were IBM long before big blue.) 3 or four years ago, the
cover
> of their magazine (The Linking Ring) featured an origami elves boot  made
of
> a dollar bill. I was hooked again. I went to a japanese restaraunt for
lunch
> that day and left a two boot tip. When I went back, they were in a little
> glass case on the register.
> Since then I've folded alot but mostly money.
> My one original creation, a Viking helmet out of a dollar bill
> Favorite new book, The buck book
> favorite paper - made by Uncle sam
> favorite folds - valley, peak
> Matthew
> Makaala647@aol.com

---------------------------------------------------------
I tried the E-mail address to no avail. (returned)
Hello Matthew are you out there???

Joe





From: Darren Scott <Darren.Scott@SCI.MONASH.EDU.AU>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 00:25
Subject: Re: [NO] Paint doesn't do it for me

Robby/Laura wrote:

>
> I strongly suggest to download LViewPro v.1.D2, from its website:
>
> http://www.lview.com
>
> It's a fully functional shareware (about $30), very compact (the executable
> is only 500 kbytes), fast and friendly. You can crop, save, resize, modify,
> retouch, change color depth, capture from screen, acquire from scanner or
> external sources, create slideshows..... nearly anything. Excellent and
> worth every cent !
Hmm If your looking for somthing like Lview but still dont have the $30
dollars to shell out try IrfanView it's every bit as good as Lview maybe
even better it will save the thumbnails and create the HTML code for a
web page. and it's FREE for noncomercial users. It has animated gif
support, and multipage TIFF support.
get it from
Homepage: http://stud1.tuwien.ac.at/~e9227474/
theres even a German version of course if you have to draw the diagrams
Lview and IrfanView wont be much help

regards
Darren





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 00:51
Subject: Re: Wet behind the ears

At 19:26 99/10/21 -0400, Rob Hudson wrote:
>Aww, Joseph!! Why do you always have to spill the beans on the jokes??

Okay, okay. I promise not to "spill the beans" about the next three jokes on
the list...assuming I notice them, of course! 8) Besides, this one was so
obvious, I really should have let it go...my apologies!

----------------------------------------------------------------
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: Katharina Grif <katharina.grif@UIBK.AC.AT>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 04:44
Subject: Re: folded tzuru in Shunga picture

Hi Maxim!

Thank you very much for URL of Ukio-e websites, they have very nice
collection!
The Shunga pictures, that i ment are something other. Word "Shunga" is
translated as Pictuers of the Spring and means an erotic painting. It was
popular and good developed in Japan at the end of 17 sentury till the
beginning of 19 sentury. So you can easy imagine, what kind of motives were
painted there. And because of that it was surprizingly for me to find the
image of folded tzuru in such kind of pictures.

with best wishes, Katharina





From: Mark Plant <mplant@UK.ORACLE.COM>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 05:29
Subject: Re: Converting Newcomers to origami (was: Re: The Price ofTechnical

I was always brought up with completely the opposite slant on things - 'there is
no such word as "can't" ...' was a phrase I had drummed into me, so I get a
little irked by people who won't have a go.

Another useful piece of advice is conveyed by these words, told to me by a
friend of mine ...

Life is a journey, not a destination. So ...
Work like you don't need money,
Love like you have never been hurt,
And dance like there is noone looking.

Best regards

Mark

Sandra P Hoffman wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Michael Janssen-Gibson wrote:
> >
> > The question is often posed to this list "how did you become interested in
> > origami?" - would it be a fair assumption that most people become
> > interested at a younger age, maybe/maybe not put it aside for a number of
> > years, and returned with a passion at a later date? I would be happy to
> > hear contrary stories.
>
> I was always told as a child that I could not do anything that required
> handiness or dexterity. Manual tasks, other than the serious gruntwork
> type housework were routinely and systematically denied me. This happened
> both at home and at school. If I were ever given paper to fold at school
> (I doubt it but don't remember everything) It would have been with the
> attitude that "well everyone else is doing it so you have to have some to
> try, but we don't expect you to actually be able to do it."
>
> By the time I had children of my own, I had learned to cook and to sew my
> own designer clothes. Both of these fell into the category of things the
> adults around me had told me that I could not ever possibly learn how to
> do. So I was into serious questioning of all that I had been told I could
> not do. Trying things out to ammuse my children was a safe way of figuring
> out what I could and could not do. If it didn't work, well it was just
> child's play and not worth worrying about.
>
> My first attempts at using paper to amuse children was freehand cutouts.
> When I was going out places with my children where there wouldn't be much
> for children to do, I would take some coloured sheets of construction or
> photocopying paper and a pair of scissors. I would get the children to ask
> me to cut them out an animal shape, and then I would freehand cut it. I
> was pretty good actually pretty good. I discovered that if I
> visualized the animal for a few minutes that my memory gave me the
> important features that made that animal recognizable. The children would
> ooh and ahh and run away to play with their animals for awhile.
>
> Origami was the next step from this. The freehand animal cut outs had no
> history as far as I knew then, but origami does have history and
> precedents and so was riskier for me. There was noone and nothing to
> measure my animal cutouts against, but I could definitely "fail" at
> origami. Nevertheless, I picked up a copy of Origami for Parties by Kazuo
> Kobayashi and Makoto Yamaguchi and folded the paper cup, brilliantly, the
> first time. I was thrilled. That would have been somewhen around 9 years
> ago. Does this sound silly? As a child I had trouble folding a fortune
> teller/cootie catcher. Something all the other children could do with
> ease.
>
> When my children were younger, I didn't have a lot of time for folding. I
> also have had very limited access to books and nice paper untill the last
> year or so. I have no pretentions that I will ever be a brilliant folder,
> but what started as a means to amuse my children and challenge the
> "truths" of my childhood, has become for me a very satisfying and healing
> part of my life. As my children have grown, my time available for folding
> has grown, and so has my love for the process of folding paper.
>
> 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: Dave Mitchell <davemitchell@MIZUSHOBAI.FREESERVE.CO.UK>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 05:41
Subject: The price of technical virtuosity

A reply to Doug .....

Doug Philips wrote:

>I strongly disagree. Had you not said 'Always' I would probably not have
had
>any such reaction.

You're right, of course. I wasn't stating a balanced case - just being
provocative as usual!

>It is certainly the case that the initial paper shape
>determines the geometries which will "flow" and those which won't. It is
for
>precisely this reason that I find the "everything must be done from a
square"
>camp to be so distorted.

I agree entirely. You can force-fold any model from any paper-shape - but
there's always one shape that yields the geometry of the folds better than
another. Why not use that?

>If one were to follow your argument to its next logical step, one would
then
>say that the "best" (or most beautiful) design strategies do not fight the
>paper, and as such, the _only_ way to "design" models without that struggle
is
>by mere experimentation or, as its often called, doodling.

Mere? experimentation. Come on - exploratory folding is what origami is
really all about.

>Fold the paper around and see what happens. If it kinda looks like a
giraffe, call it one. Is
>that what you're advocating? If not, how is what you're advocating
different?

There's an essay on this precise subject on my website if you're interested.
Go to www.mizushobai.freeserve.co.uk and follow the links through Origami
for Aficionados to Beyond Diagrams.

>Simply because Kawahata (for example) has found a particular construction
>attractive/desirable/beautiful for use in a particular model does _not_ a
>priori make it fighting with the paper.

True - but incorporating it in a preconceived final design often has this
effect. Even Yoshizawa is not immune to this. Take a look for instance at
the Romulus and Remus photo in the April '99 British Origami. The head is
wonderful. But the rest is not of a similar standard. Incidentally it's
worth comparing this model with the original statue that it's an origami
version of. In my opinion the head on Yoshizawa's is much more wolf-like but
as a whole the original statue is incomparably more beautiful.

On the other hand - as Paul Jackson pointed out - beauty in origami is not
only about the final result but also how you get there. I've frankly no idea
how Yoshizawa got there so maybe making any judgements on this model is
decidedly dangerous.

A reply to Joseph .....

I think we know by now that even when we say the same thing it will come out
sounding as though we're saying precisely the opposite. However ....

>Taking your comments into other
>realms of art, you have excluded any sort of representational art
>(portraiture, landscapes, busts, etc.) because they are all based on
>choosing the result in advance and striving to achieve it. Does that then
>mean that the artists are fighting with their media

No. I think you're overlooking the essential nature of origami. It's
constrained by what I call the 'interconnectedness' of the paper in a way
that possibly no other medium is.

If you paint with oils then provided you have the technical ability you can
depict anything to very much the same standard of verisimilitude or
abstraction. The medium is flexible enough - and technically advanced
enough - to permit this.

Origami, however, is neither, which is why I believe that an approach which
starts with an exploration of what the paper wishes to become and proceeds
in a way that build the design as a harmonious whole is a better route to
follow.

Paul Jackson's Elephant, for instance, is a brilliant example of this
holistic approach to origami design.

>Kawahata strikes me as being a talented man, both technically and
>artistically. If his sole desire was to solve technical problems, he
>probably would not bother with origami. He told me at length about his work
>at Toyota, designing advanced braking systems for next generation vehicles.

I really think it's time I left Kawahata alone. I only picked on his work
because it had been the subject of so much indiscriminating praise. On the
other hand it doesn't surprise me to learn that he is an engineer. His
approach to origami is entirely consistent with this. First plan it in
theory - then work out how to do it in practice. I just feel this isn't the
best approach. That's all.

>His genius lies in learning techniques from others
>and then using them in new ways to create his creatures.

Yes - but think about it, Joseph. Isn't this precisely what experimental
design work means?

Enough - I'm going on holiday!

Dave





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 06:53
Subject: Re: $ bill viking Helmet

Papa Joe <papajoe@CHORUS.NET> sez

>I Just came up with a $bill Viking helmet but........
>I know this model has been done by someone before

I've a feeling John Nordquist did something along these lines. I've got
a Viking helmet from a square at my homepages..

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: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 06:53
Subject: Re: The price of technical virtuosity

David Whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU> sez

>this whole thread was originally based on attacking
>people who value pushing the limits of what they can achieve

I disagree, it seemed to me to be making a point about whether a
finished model has inherent beauty, which, despite the contributions to
this interesting thread, remains a totally subjective issue.

I'm pleased to see there has been a lot of people conceding and agreeing
with points and a far fewer repeating narrow-minded rants. The signal to
noise ratio of this list has risen substantially!

all the best,

Nick "also from Yorkshire" 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: Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 08:23
Subject: Re: The price of technical virtuosity

>===== Original Message From Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU> =====
>I'm pleased to see there has been a lot of people conceding and agreeing
>with points and a far fewer repeating narrow-minded rants. The signal to
>noise ratio of this list has risen substantially!
I must have missed those 'narrow-minded rants'; could you repeat them please?

Matthias





From: Robby/Laura <morassi@ZEN.IT>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 08:29
Subject: Re: A Reply to Ronald Koh

Marc,
> If I wanted a realistic dog, I
>would just buy one. If I wanted to get a sence of what the essense of a dog
>is to a particualr artist, the constraints of origami provide for an
>excellent distillation medium.

That reminds me of what Paul Jackson told me several years ago, at a BOS
meeting. He was showing me one of his "dogs" with an unlikely triangular
face, maybe three legs, and folded with a blue paper. And he observed: "Of
course this is NOT a dog. Not even a reproduction or a portrait of a real
dog. It's an ORIGAMI DOG."

Pretty much the same concept.......

Roberto





From: Cathy <cathypl@GENERATION.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 09:38
Subject: Re: Sticky-out piece? [was The Price of Technical Virtuosity]

At 06:27 PM 99-10-20 +0200, you wrote:
>Ronald Koh wrote:
>>
>> ... one with the sticky-out piece coming out the rear end? Whatcha
>> talkin'
>> 'bout, Mathias? :o)
>
>Uh, oh, I mean... well... *cough*
>
>Matthias
>
>

He means the tail, of course!  Whatever did you think he meant??  ;-)

                                        Cathy
******^^^^^*****^^^^^*****

Cathy Palmer-Lister
Ste. Julie, Quebec
Canada
cathypl@generation.net





From: Carlos Alberto Furuti <furuti@AHAND.UNICAMP.BR>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 09:56
Subject: Re: Dinosaur models

>>From: "Dr Stephen O'Hanlon" <fishgoth@HOTMAIL.COM>

>>I've flat scanned four of my display models; A Triceratops, A T-rex, An
>>Allosaurus and a Deinonycus. These are on the 'Whats new' section of my web
>>page. If I get enough positive feedback I'll try and get the diagrams for

For his newest dinosaurs Dr. O'Hanlon has adopted painting. *Maybe Xuxa
Rojas has hooked a new boyfriend*?
Seriously speaking now, judging from looks only (no, I won't start another
what's better/more beautiful, structure/looks/technique/whatever thread) they
look nice although of course the scanning denies evaluation of 3D appearance.
Especially the deinonychus seems a improvement from your previous smaller
theropods.

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





From: Ronald Koh <ronkoh@SINGNET.COM.SG>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 10:28
Subject: Re: Really LONG: Re: [Long] The Price of Technical Virtuosity

Just a couple of points in response to Doug's response to my response to
his ..... (where am I?)

Doug Philips wrote:
>
> Since Paul has answered, at least in part, I'll refrain from muddying the
> waters further, at least for a while, regarding my
> understanding/interpretation of what he was trying to say. ;-)

Uh-uh. Paul answered just one of three questions - you can do better
.... ;oP
>
I wrote in am earlier posting:

> +We seem to have different interpretations on what 'beauty' (or
> +'beautiful') means. I see it in the broader sense. The Concise Oxford
Dictionary has a number interpretations, e.g. delighting the eye or ear;
gratifying any taste; morally or intellectually impressive; combination
of qualities as shape, proportion, colour, in human face or form, or in
other objects, that delights the sight; .... the particular point that
gives satisfaction; etc, etc.

Doug replied:

> Are you saying your definition is broader than the COD's defintion, or that
> you are taking their definition as yours? (or ... ??)

My statement was in response to yours, i.e.:

> How can you create beauty under those restrictions? (And I'd take
> Beauty in the larger sense, not restricted to "nice" or "good").

The COD provides a number of definitions for 'beauty'. The point I was
trying to make is that 'beauty' as so defined can be derived under the
constraints of the origami. 'The particular point that gives
satisfaction' is sufficiently encompassing

Doug asked:

> What does qualified mean?

OK, bad choice of terminology. What I meant to say was, who among us are
able to back our arguements on what constitutes 'ugly' and non-ugly (for
want of a better term) origami with indisputable authority. ( Awww,
forget it - you're going to ask what 'indisputable authority' means
next) :o(

Ron Koh
(Back to the diagramming PC)





From: Ronald Koh <ronkoh@SINGNET.COM.SG>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 10:32
Subject: Re: A Reply to Ronald Koh

And THAT is not an 'ugly' dog....!? :oP

Paul, what is your daffy-nition of 'ugly'. anyway :o)

Robby/Laura wrote:

> That reminds me of what Paul Jackson told me several years ago, (snip) .. And
     he observed: "Of
> course this is NOT a dog. Not even a reproduction or a portrait of a real
> dog. It's an ORIGAMI DOG."
>
> Pretty much the same concept.......
>
> Roberto





From: Ronald Koh <ronkoh@SINGNET.COM.SG>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 10:35
Subject: Re: Sticky-out piece? [was The Price of Technical Virtuosity]

Uh-uh! Good try, but no cigar! Guess again ....!

Cathy wrote:
>
> At 06:27 PM 99-10-20 +0200, you wrote:
> >Ronald Koh wrote:
> >>
> >> ... one with the sticky-out piece coming out the rear end? Whatcha
> >> talkin'
> >> 'bout, Mathias? :o)
> >
> >Uh, oh, I mean... well... *cough*
> >
> >Matthias
> >
> >
>
> He means the tail, of course!  Whatever did you think he meant??  ;-)
>
>                                         Cathy
> ******^^^^^*****^^^^^*****
>
> Cathy Palmer-Lister
> Ste. Julie, Quebec
> Canada
> cathypl@generation.net





From: Scott Cramer <scram@LANDMARKNET.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 10:49
Subject: Re: Sticky-out piece? [was The Price of Technical Virtuosity]

>> >> ... one with the sticky-out piece coming out the rear end? Whatcha
>> >> talkin'
>> >> 'bout, Mathias? :o)

>> He means the tail, of course!  Whatever did you think he meant??  ;-)

>Uh-uh! Good try, but no cigar! Guess again ....!

I'm gonna guess it isn't a cigar, either.

Scott





From: Cathy <cathypl@GENERATION.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 10:58
Subject: Re: Converting Newcomers to origami (was: Re: The Price of Technical

At 04:04 PM 99-10-21 +1000, you wrote:
>> Robin Glynn indited:
>
>> What would be most likely to convert a newcomer to paper folding?
>
>Sometimes I get the feeling that newcomers to origami need to have the
>correct "gene" before they are attracted to actually wanting to folding
>something for themselves, rather than just "oohing" and "aaahing" over
>folded models.

At a recent sci-fi convention here in Montreal, I taught Perry's fire
Lizard.  It was very successful, the folders were all novices who were
hooked by the dragon.  People notice the models that reflect their personal
interests.  One of the participants was a friend of mine who attended
mainly besause she's a friend of mine.  She found it terribly frustrating,
and at one point i thought she was close to tears, but stuck with it, then
thrilled with the results she folded another so that she would remember how
to do it on her own.  A while later I met her in the hall, she grabbed my
arm and yelled, " Now look at what you've got me doing!  I'm making a mess
of all my flyers!"  Sure enough, all the fan club folders were creased and
battered into odd shapes.  :-)

                Cathy
******^^^^^*****^^^^^*****

Cathy Palmer-Lister
Ste. Julie, Quebec
Canada
cathypl@generation.net





From: Missle Casanova <Misle1149@AOL.COM>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 11:29
Subject: Re: The Origami Man  I feel  ur pain

Hey  i  know  what it  feels  like  i've  been  called  origami  freak  my
     personal  fav  well  don't  worry  they're   just made  cause they  don't
     now how  to  feld  haha  laters





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 11:48
Subject: Re: The price of technical virtuosity

>I disagree, it seemed to me to be making a point about whether a
>finished model has inherent beauty, which, despite the contributions to
>this interesting thread, remains a totally subjective issue.
>

Yes I know, but notice I used the word "originally" this thread has evolved
into much more but it started as an attack.

David





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 11:54
Subject: Re: A Reply to Ronald Koh

>And THAT is not an 'ugly' dog....!? :oP
>
>Paul, what is your daffy-nition of 'ugly'. anyway :o)
>

Ouch!  Now you guys are attacking each others works, I think I'll hide
under a rock and wait for the blood to be spilled and the sinks to be
unsinked

David





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 11:56
Subject: Spirals

Okay can somebody tell me what the name for that way cool spiral in the
blue Spirals book on page 37 is?  Thank you.

David





From: Scott Cramer <scram@LANDMARKNET.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 12:11
Subject: Re: Spirals

>Okay can somebody tell me what the name for that way cool spiral in the
>blue Spirals book on page 37 is?  Thank you.

    It's actually called "Wicked Neat Spiral".

(That's #2, if you're counting, Joseph)

Scott scram@landmarknet.net





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 12:33
Subject: Re: Spirals

At 12:08 99/10/22 -0400, you wrote:
>>Okay can somebody tell me what the name for that way cool spiral in the
>>blue Spirals book on page 37 is?  Thank you.
>
>    It's actually called "Wicked Neat Spiral".
>
>(That's #2, if you're counting, Joseph)

Oh, no! That means I missed #1! (Blame it on the insomnia last night...only
1.5 hours of sleep!)

----------------------------------------------------------------
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: Scott Cramer <scram@LANDMARKNET.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 12:42
Subject: Re: Spirals

>Oh, no! That means I missed #1! (Blame it on the insomnia last night...only
>1.5 hours of sleep!)

    Spoken like a true newlywed...

>>(That's #2, if you're counting)

    It just occurred to me that that is also the answer to the 'sticky bits'
on the dog question.

Scott scram@landmarknet.net





From: Robby/Laura <morassi@ZEN.IT>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 13:29
Subject: Re: Origami chat on IRC

Anine / Josefin,
At 03.23 21/10/1999 -0400, you wrote:

>Which reminds me, are any of you folders on IRC? I'm sitting here all alone
>and thought it would be nice to chat with some origami-freaks

Proposals for IRC Origami chatrooms have been advanced in the past, by
Jerry Harris (two years ago), myself (last year) and others. I'm definitely
convinced of the superiority of IRC character-based chats over the now
popular Web chats: total freedom, speed, no need for special servers, no
clubs, no registration, and NO Java applets which are inherently complex,
slow and often unreliable. The only thing needed is the installation of an
IRC client program: the best one for Windows is mIRC (shareware) whose
latest version (5.6) can be downloaded from

http://www.mirc.com

It can be set up in seconds, needs some easy training for the basic
commands, and you're ready to go !

>I have checked if there was an origami channel (that is #Origami) but didn't
>find any. If there's already an origami channel out there please let me know
>and tell me the server name!

As far as I know, there is no permanent #Origami channel in any of the big
IRC networks (DALnet, IRCnet, Undernet, EFnet.....) but that's no problem:
ANYONE can create a personal channel (=chatroom) in a few seconds, and if
others know in advance the IRC network, channel name, and time of creation,
they can join it and start chatting !

As to your question, what you need is not a "server" name, just the "IRC
network" name where the channel will be created. For example, if we choose
DALnet, you can connect to it by ANY DALnet server (simply an access gate):
you'd better choose a "Random EU server" if you are in Europe, or a "Random
US server" in the USA, or even a specific server in your State (for
presumably faster connection), but this is NOT essential: anyone connected
to DALnet through any server will have access to the SAME channels (usually
several thousands....). Smaller IRC networks like Xnet (with just a few
hundred channels) are less crowded, and possibly a better choice.

But OK, it's time to try. What I suggest:

1) I shall create a channel named #origami, in DALnet, on Thursday 28th
October, 0.00 GMT. This is actually Thu. 1.00 AM in the UK and Western
Europe timezone; 2.00 AM in Middle Europe (here, sigh..... ); Wed. 8.00 PM,
EDT; Wed. 7.00 PM, CDT; Wed. 6.00 PM, MDT; Wed. 5.00 PM, PDT.

2) My nick will be "Robbix". When connected to DALnet, you can type /list
to see if #origami is among the channels. This however will list thousands
of channels, at the risk of being disconnected: better, type /who origami
to see if the channel exists, and if so, /join origami, and you will find
me waiting..... If you want to send me a personal message, type /whois
Robbix (to see if I am connected), then /msg Robbix text-of-message.

Anyone needing help about IRC chatting or mIRC, please e-mail me privately.

Looking forward to "meeting" you live on the Net....

Roberto

=======================
PROF. ROBERTO MORASSI
VIA PALESTRO, 11
51100 PISTOIA
ITALY
=======================
E-mail:  morassi@zen.it
tel & fax: (+)39-0573-20436





From: Robby/Laura <morassi@ZEN.IT>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 13:29
Subject: Re: [NO] Paint doesn't do it for me

Darren,
At 14.00 22/10/1999 +1000, you wrote:

>Hmm If your looking for somthing like Lview but still dont have the $30
>dollars to shell out try IrfanView

I can remark, to my defense (?):

1) if you don't have the 30 bucks, you can still use LView with no
restrictions (as far as I remember), other than having to close a
"reminder" window every time.....
2) dare I add that LView32 does work in a prehistoric Win3.11/Win32s
environment (the one in this good old machine I'm still refusing to get rid
of !), but IrfanView does not :-)

Having said that, I agree with you that IrfanView is really an excellent
freeware program. I can also add that it let's you "view" (i.e. "listen
to") audio files .WAV and others.

>of course if you have to draw the diagrams
>Lview and IrfanView wont be much help

that was out of question...... ;-)

Roberto





From: Terrence Rioux <trioux@WHOI.EDU>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 13:57
Subject: Re: SEOF Crane Mobile

The other week I mentioned the crane mobile exhibited at the
Southeastern Origami Festival (SEOF)held in September, 1998 in
Charlotte, North Carolina.  I finally found the photos I took, brought
them into work and had someone scan them into three .jpg files.  If
anyone is interested in looking at them, let me know (private email,
please to avoid unnecessary bandwidth on the list) and I'll email you
the pictures.

Terry Rioux





From: Evi <d.evi.l@MUENSTER.DE>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 15:04
Subject: Re: A Reply to Ronald Koh

eh you guys, go into the woods and ask the trees, what they are thinking
about origami in general, and which model they prefer to turn into.

Besides, why is the paper always so stubborn, it doesn't want to be folded,
right? :o)

Happy mailskipping Evi





From: Dorothy Engleman <FoldingCA@WEBTV.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 15:31
Subject: Re: Thoki Yenn's Abstract Form

I wrote:

"If you turn Thoki's model over 45 degrees, you get an iceberg."

Sorry, that was incorrect. For an iceberg, turn the model over 90
degrees and then turn it upright to rest on a table.

Dorothy, claiming temporary insanity due to earthquake and torrid desert
heat





From: Arlene Anderson <aanderso@BCPL.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 17:11
Subject: Re: 5-point Star

Directions can be found at the following web site:
http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagstar.html

Arlene Anderson

On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Lori Gregory. wrote:

> Can anyone help this person with the 5-point star?  Please respond to him
> directly and his address is JMCDONALL@aol.com.  Thank you.
>
> (This message was forwarded to me from another teacher at his school.)
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jim McDonald
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 2:37 PM
> > To:   LWES
> > Subject:  Help!!!!!!
> >
> > Dear Staff,
> >   My 8th grade son has a history packet due and we are having trouble
> > with one step.
> > Does anyone know how to produce a five-point star by folding and making
> > one cut? If so, E-mail me at A.S.A.P.
> >
> > Jim Mc





From: Dan Gries <dangries@MATH.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 17:16
Subject: i'm headed for japan

(i'm the newbie that asked for a koi model - i have decided to create one, and
it seems to be working out quite well!  but thanks for the info about LaFosse's
model.)

anyway, as the subject line states, i'm taking a trip to japan in november, and
am wondering if there are any places to visit, or supplies or books to buy.
what would an origami enthusiast like to do in japan?  most likely i won't get
too far away from tokyo.  i'll be staying in a town called Kashiwa.

but if you know of a place to visit, please let me know.  for example, is
there a well-known place to buy many types of paper?  are there things that
i can get in japan that i can't get in the USA?  or perhaps there is an
exhibit somewhere.

any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.  (BTW, i don't speak the
language, but will be accompanied by my girlfriend, who does.)

and let me just say that anyone who folds anything from something other than
a square sheet, and thinks he/she made something beautiful, is just a complete
fool, and perhaps a little dangerous, and should be kept away from your
children.  i just wanted to add to that important thread.  (oooh...newbie
treading into the wrong territory....!!)

thanks in advance,

-dan





From: collin weber <coljwebwhs@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 20:11
Subject: new diagrams for the internet

Is any one interested in some diagrams of animals to put on their websites?
So far I have a hummingbird afrog on a lilypad, a terrier, barnswallow, and
a toucan with plenty more to diagram.  I would really like some people to
see some of my work so this would be very much appreciated.

Thanks
Collin Weber

coljwebwhs@hotmail.com

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





From: Eric Andersen <ema@NETSPACE.ORG>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 20:32
Subject: Re: new diagrams for the internet

Collin,
I would be happy to put your diagrams on my Web site (paperfolding.com).

-Eric :-P
origami@netspace.org

On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, collin weber wrote:

>Is any one interested in some diagrams of animals to put on their websites?
>So far I have a hummingbird afrog on a lilypad, a terrier, barnswallow, and
>a toucan with plenty more to diagram.  I would really like some people to
>see some of my work so this would be very much appreciated.

/=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\
\   Eric Andersen                                       /
/    Mathematics, Music             ~  ~ __o            \
\     and Origami                 ~  ~ _-\<'_           /
/      ema@netspace.org        ~    ~ (_)/ (_)          \
\=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=/
         *** http://www.paperfolding.com ***





From: John Hancock <jwhancock34@YAHOO.COM>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 20:34
Subject: Re: new diagrams for the internet

What kind of terrier? I'd love to have a diagram for
an Airedale.

Later,

John

--- collin weber <coljwebwhs@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:
> Is any one interested in some diagrams of animals to
> put on their websites?
> So far I have a hummingbird afrog on a lilypad, a
> terrier, barnswallow, and
> {deletia}
> Thanks
> Collin Weber

=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 22:17
Subject: Re: i'm headed for japan

>and let me just say that anyone who folds anything from something other than
>a square sheet, and thinks he/she made something beautiful, is just a complete
>fool, and perhaps a little dangerous, and should be kept away from your
>children.  i just wanted to add to that important thread.  (oooh...newbie
>treading into the wrong territory....!!)

What!?  I've been studying too much this week, could somebody explain to me
if this is a joke or the ravings of an eccentric paperfolder?

David
