Pureland Origami

[bethnor]

behold my rendition of joseph wu's stegosaurus (perhaps the purest of pureland origami):



i know your jealousy of my impeccable folding technique is greener than this sheet of paper.

yes, i know joseph designed this as a joke. still, however, it captures the essence of what pureland origami is supposed to be, i think.

you can see from this, then, that it would have been impossible for kamiya to "simplify" his loggerhead into something like this. it would have to be an entirely different model altogether, and he would call it something different.

here are some more diagrams for pureland origami. simple origami is okay. there is beauty in a perfectly folded simple model that you won't find in a lot of these wrinkled, crumpled, and smushed complex stuff.
i notice that we've had an influx of new folders who are tackling stuff that is way too hard (asking for photodiagrams for valley and mountain folds... really?). start with the simple stuff and work your way up. it's okay. i love helping ppl finish models, but the rash of "i need help with step 38... thanks, now how about step 39... thanks now how about step 40" is getting a little silly.

[orislater]

but asking for m/v's on a cp is ok right?

[origamimasterjared]

Hey beth, I designed a pureland boxpleat person today. Pretty cool, huh?

[andssl]

I agree with you, Bethnor. I believe that the way of contemporary origami in direction to super complex origami is a misunderstanding. There are several supercomplex models that seem to me very weird and awful. There are very simple and intermediate models that reveal a great beauty in a smart way. The question is: is the art of origami valued by its mathmatical complexity or your speechless beauty? There are very creatos of the past that the people are forgetting in reason of the thinking that complex origami only has value. At the day that Kamiya can produce a incredible simple curved folding like Yoshizawa or Diang ding, I can call him "an origami artist". To me Kamiya is a creator of complex origami only. Not a ancomplished artist in the esthetics sense of modern art.

[DavidW]

I have done well with such advice. I've turned back to the basics and have focused on just folding easy models well, knowing that in time I can look at the difficult stuff. Just spending more time sharpening the creases and not stopping until I've done a fold precisely as diagrammed, no matter how long it takes has greatly improved my finished origami models.

In my time on the Origami-L I've seen great origami galleries. Some fold with foil, some with kami, others use kraft and tant, some with expensive washi one just with printer paper. What they have in common is not the choice of paper, but how slow, careful and precise they are with their folds.

So my goal now is not to fold hyper complex folds badly, but instead to fold intermediate folds neatly.

[Metangas]

Well, sadly, I'm no designer yet, but I have to agree on the beauty of simplicity. In the 3-4 years I've been folding, the majority has been below average complexity. As of such, while some people think Origami=Satoshi Kamiya, I believe that, even though Satoshi makes some good models, people such as Hoang Tien Quyet, Joseph Wu and Roman Diaz make wonderfully crafted masterpieces too, and that's just to name a few.

I have seen the simplest of models, turned into wonders of art. I too, think that the opinion "Super-complex=Best/Great/Heaven/Wonder/Ultimate-Achievement etc." of the target. Origami is, after all, praising the true beauty of paper.

[kevin89]

I agree with the above. And this is why I love Robert Lang. Because as well as folding dificult models, he folds them really well. And by that I mean very clean folding, none of the layers are"spilling" out of the model, very slender arms/legs/whatever else (as required by the model).

[orislater]

im with you kevin89

[PhillipORigami]

so am I.