Satoshi Kamiya - Ryu Zin (CP Study by zebu)

Finward · Post by **Finward** » June 13th, 2009, 4:37 am

Tha claws. In 3.5, claws are large, while in 3.1 claws ares still pretty small

legionzilla · Post by **legionzilla** » June 13th, 2009, 5:03 am

Also, 3.5 has scales on the legs while 3.1 does not.

Kijjakarn · Post by **Kijjakarn** » June 13th, 2009, 5:39 am

Umm... I think Finward was correct, 3.5 has larger claws.
I think I looked carefully at the picture here: http://www.folders.jp/g/2001/0123.html it has scales on the legs, isn't it. And the one that does not have scales on shoulders is 2.1. Sorry if I'm wrong.

origamimasterjared · Post by **origamimasterjared** » June 13th, 2009, 5:43 am

3.1 has the scales on the legs--that's 2.1 that doesn't.

3.5 is slightly more detailed, and has claws about double the size as in 3.1. They're not like in then Ancient Dragon, whereas 3.1 uses the same toes as the Ancient Dragon. Also the legs are slightly longer I think. They're not purely box-pleated.

I prefer the look of Satoshi's 3.1 to his 3.5.

Kafar · Post by **Kafar** » June 13th, 2009, 7:43 am

the claws are made differently

Kijjakarn · Post by **Kijjakarn** » June 13th, 2009, 1:55 pm

I have both CPs of 3.1 and 3.5. Now I have figured out why the legs are different!

origami street racer · June 13th, 2009, 8:24 pm

origamimasterjared wrote:3.1 has the scales on the legs--that's 2.1 that doesn't.

3.5 is slightly more detailed, and has claws about double the size as in 3.1. They're not like in then Ancient Dragon, whereas 3.1 uses the same toes as the Ancient Dragon. Also the legs are slightly longer I think. They're not purely box-pleated.

I prefer the look of Satoshi's 3.1 to his 3.5.

I prefer to fold 3.5 because the shoulders are more easly collasped than 3.1

legionzilla · Post by **legionzilla** » June 14th, 2009, 6:34 am

3.1 has the scales on the legs--that's 2.1 that doesn't.

Oh, I think I got confused.

Kijjakarn · Post by **Kijjakarn** » June 22nd, 2009, 2:29 am

Anyone can fold the connection part between head and body?

Kafar · Post by **Kafar** » June 22nd, 2009, 9:03 am

I can

Kijjakarn · Post by **Kijjakarn** » June 22nd, 2009, 10:07 am

Can you show me?

Froy · Post by **Froy** » June 22nd, 2009, 7:40 pm

Conection for 2.1 or 3.5?

I can help you with the 2.1 conection.

darkeagle · Post by **darkeagle** » June 22nd, 2009, 9:53 pm

really froy

Edited by Moderator: Please write in English

Kijjakarn · Post by **Kijjakarn** » June 23rd, 2009, 9:16 am

For 2.1.

muraenosaur · Post by **muraenosaur** » June 24th, 2009, 11:15 pm

if you notice the scales on the body of 2.1 are diff than the scales on the bodies of 3.1 and 3.5.