New Kamiya Model

[ginshun]

Kind of sounds like you are taking your own opinions on "purism" and applying it to the entire world of origami. Seems like pretty much all of Kamiyas models can be made with just paper and MC. I don't think most of the origami world is opposed to using some MC to size the paper beforehand and/or to do a little shaping at the end.

[Razzmatazz]

It could be simply that I am taking what I admire about origami and voicing my opinions on that.

Kamiya has some great models and I certainly don't mind complexity. What I do mind is when a person struggles to make a model without the use of a 2 meter square and the help of wires and glue.

[ginshun]

That makes sence. Personally I have been shying away from anything too complex lately just because I am not a huge fan of having to fold one model in multiple sessions. Between work and kids and whatever else, it's hard for me to get even an hour or two uninterrupted, much less 5 or 6 or more.

[Mir Numaan]

simple answer, even if kamiya's models are simple or complex they always look great in the end. Complexity does not matter, final thing matters, at least for me.

[Swapnil Das]

Very very true.

[ginshun]

There is nothing better than a model that is easy to fold, yet looks really good when done.
Shuki Kato's "Simple Dragon" is one of my favorite models. At 60 steps it's not exactly simple, but it's not 100 or 200 like some others out there, and I have had nice results with several different papers.

[mikaorigami]

I feel there is nothing inherently wrong with his models. I understand the issue with a model like ryujin which needs glue, wire and a huge sheet, but neither does it represent his entire way of designing, nor origami as a whole. Though ryujin is hyped, i still think its a great model. He also has some models that maybe are needlessly complex for their output, but there are also some great ones.

He probably makes what he enjoys to do, and as such its great. There are so many designers with loads of styles and techniques and the diversity, from genius simple, to crazy complex, is what makes the artform interesting to me.

[ginshun]

Don't get me wrong, I love Kamiya's models. I have folded roughly a dozen or so of his models, and even if the folding sequences are a little long winded, for the most part, they are fun models to fold, that turn out to be awesome when you finally finish.

[Justinorigami]

I don't understand why people think the ryujin 3.5 is needlessly complex. While it is true that the model is very complex, that doesn't mean that it is uselessly complex. To fold a dragon of that detail, you will need a really large square and MC to fold it. I don't think it is possible to design a dragon with that detail from a square less efficient then the ryujin 3.5...

[Langko]

Justin: I think you meant "more" efficient? It's easy to make something less efficient...

Personal Opinion: If someone wants to take a 2m square of paper and spend hours upon hours folding it into something, (because they want to challenge themselves or what ever other reason the folder has for doing so) then that's 100% fine. If someone want to take a 20cm square of paper and spend 30mins folding it into something, then that's 100% fine as well. Origami is an art form. And every artist does things differently and has there own style. Let each artist express themselves in the way that represents them

Back to the topic of Kamiyas new model: I think it looks very cool, nice use of colour changes. And nice to see the full cp of his turtle on his website too!

[bethnor]

I don't understand why people think the ryujin 3.5 is needlessly complex. While it is true that the model is very complex, that doesn't mean that it is uselessly complex. To fold a dragon of that detail, you will need a really large square and MC to fold it. I don't think it is possible to design a dragon with that detail from a square less efficient then the ryujin 3.5...

then don't make it from a square?

again, you seem to be prescribing to the view that if you aren't a kamiya fanboy, you should just shut up.

plenty of wonderful designs are now made by breaking the rules. to do the ryu-zin, one is already committing to heaping on glue and wire. why does it need to be from a square?

why do you take it so personally when some of us point that the ryu-zin is inefficient with it's paper? it is. that doesn't mean the model is horrible, or ugly, or bad, or hideous. it's nothing to pull your hair out about or get into a twist about. by necessity, to achieve "the twist," it wastes tons of paper, when one could probably achieve a similar result by using a strip of paper, or multiple sheets, which people other than kamiya have. why do you get defensive when people point this out?

and, for the record, one of my favorite models is therealjuston's jabba the hut. guess what criticism he has of his own design? it wastes paper.

[GrossMichael]

Bethnor, you're right. You have to consider that kamiya doesn't design only for other folders. Origami doesn't have a standard of rules, you can do what you allow yourself. If you don't like kamiyas modeld, which are mostly pure, you shouldn't fold them.

[Justinorigami]

I think I'm being misunderstood. My point wasn't about telling you to shut up if you aren't a Kamiya fan. I just don't appreciate people calling the ryujin 3.5 inefficient. It can't go any more efficient than that. It is a truly genius design, as it at first seemed impossible to design a dragon of such detail from an uncut square of paper. To say, "well just use a rectangle!" is avoiding the point I am trying to make.

[bethnor]

but the point you refuse to see is that, by basically demanding that one uses glue and wire, the model has already thrown purism out the window. why is it that one uncut square is the one element of purism that is retained? answer: arbitrary bragging rights. designers like joseph wu, leo lai, and akira yoshizawa could have designed such models, but at least wu and yoshisazawa have gone on record as saying they don't like the thickness the subsequent design would require. so they use multiple sheets, violating these arbitrary rules to achieve what they feel is a more aesthetically pleasing design which is... yes... more efficient with the paper.

[Edg]

It's an interesting debate... does foreknowledge of an objects manufacture increase/decrese its aesthetic qualities in the eye of the beholder? Is a hand carved figurine more pleasing than one created using a 3d printer, if they appear identical? If you have no knowledge of origami, its hard to comprehend how something like the ryujin can be folded from a square, so surely that adds some sense of wonder, but does it justify the slight lack of elegance in certain parts? All artists must impose some arbitrary rules to themselves before they create something, no matter how broad, but of course, the breaking of these rules can sometimes lead to something truly exciting! The one thing that seems truly taboo in modern origami is the use of cutting (perhaps a natural product of the powerful folding techniques that have been developed) but who knows what will come next?