Joseph Wu's works

[wolf]

Purist...you know, one sheet, no cuts, spending 10 years meditating before making the first fold, that kind of thing.

Perfectionism is nice, but it takes forever, and besides, it's the prototyping phase that's the most fun.

[cybermystic]

I did like the gallery of AD&D miniatures. The origami Illithid (Mind Flayer) is one of my personal favorites. Clearly a case of overlapping hobbies. Mr. Wu, you either have indulgent friends or a RPG troupe with an artistic bent.

As for origami purity, If the model starts from a square and is not cut or glued, then it is pure origami. Not to be confused with pureland origami, which is simple folds (mountain and valley) only; no reverse folds or sinks allowed.

I don't know about the ten years meditating, though. As much as I enjoy folding, I don't think I could remember what I intended to fold for that long

[wolf]

Well, if you're an RPGer on a budget, origami is a cheap (but not necessarily quick!) way of making tabletop miniatures. Unless you're one of those Games Workshop fans that insist on painting and customising each precious lead figures...

And I'm sure designers have spent 10 years thinking about how to best proceed with a given design before making the first fold.

[Joseph Wu]

Mr. Wu, you either have indulgent friends or a RPG troupe with an artistic bent.

Okay, first let's get rid of the "Mr. Wu" nonsense. I'm still young enough to think of that as referring to my dad.

And my gaming buddies aren't particularly artistic, apart from a few who like to paint minis. But they do enjoy seeing my latests creations.

[cybermystic]

Wolf, I have designed two models in my life. The first was everything I wnted it to be on the fifth try (took me six months). The second time, I was aiming for an octopus and I missed. The folds, however, made a pretty little waterlily (the mistake took 2 minutes).

This leads to a question: Why are my mistakes so much prettier than my successes?

[wolf]

This leads to a question: Why are my mistakes so much prettier than my successes?

The beauty of serendipity? Our esteemed Mr. Wu can tell you more about that, I'm sure.

(Yes, Joseph, I'm being annoying. Done any penguins lately? )

[Joseph Wu]

The beauty of serendipity? Our esteemed Mr. Wu can tell you more about that, I'm sure.

Well, there certainly are people who like to design by "doodling". I used to do that a bit, but haven't really used it in a long time.

(Yes, Joseph, I'm being annoying. Done any penguins lately? )

Okay, girl with one leg longer than the other.

I may have done a penguin or two for fun in the last year or so. Don't really remember. Just don't tell Vincent Floderer ("Oh, no, not another penguin!").

[T]

Joseph Wu's ancient Wyrm gave me the idea for my 5 piece dragon,

Picture available at http://www.origamiinteractive.com in the My Own designs Gallery .

Its no where near as good as the ancient Wyrm but It was my second ever creation and more importantly the first creation I actually thought about how to design.

My favourite Joseph Wu models are 1. Ancient Wyrm
2.Wild Boar
3. Nightmare and rider

[cybermystic]

A funny story on the armadillo:

Here, armadillos generally have one of two types of markings: Firestone or Goodyear. I made an armadillo for my boss and it sat on his desk, near his computer. Nobody recognized it at first, but after his monitor fell over and... made it look more 'natural'...
"Oh! That's what that is!"
"An armadillo! That's so neat!"
"Sweet! He knows how to make a roadkill armadillo?"

It's still one of my favorites.

[thedeadsmellbad]

No one will ever become a great origami artist by relying on diagrams (or CPs, for that matter)

I have never learned origami from another person. Sorry to say but, I have never even met another person that was a folder. All my experience, all the way back to the 3rd grade, has been built on diagrams/cp's etc.
Although the term "great origami artist" is subjective, people have used it in my direction. So I don't think the idea is so remote as it has been suggested.

My thoughts are this,
documented instruction is vital. Perhaps more so to some extent than ceaseless new models. The reason is this: when the designer dies, so does the model.
Too few are taught in person to keep it from slipping into obscurity. Even more so, too few are good enough to fold from looking at a finished model.

A suggestion.
If nothing else, consider videotaping the folding session. There are many ways to document & preserve the process for the world & our children's children.

Lastly,
Thank you for sharing your designs. They are the subject of much interest.

[Joseph Wu]

I have never learned origami from another person. Sorry to say but, I have never even met another person that was a folder. All my experience, all the way back to the 3rd grade, has been built on diagrams/cp's etc.
Although the term "great origami artist" is subjective, people have used it in my direction. So I don't think the idea is so remote as it has been suggested.

As long as you continue to fold other people's designs, whether you learn from diagrams, CPs, videos, personal lessons, or whatever, you limit yourself. Art is about creation. It is about self-expression. It is giving form to something within you. That's what I meant by that statement. When I do origami for my clients, it is usually not art. It is their vision that I'm fulfilling, not mine. Sometimes I get inspired enough by a commission that I produce something personal, and it becomes art, but often I do not. I usually produce art when I work on my own projects.

In other words, skill and technique do not an artist make. They are just tools that can be used by the artist to create art.

My thoughts are this,
documented instruction is vital. Perhaps more so to some extent than ceaseless new models. The reason is this: when the designer dies, so does the model.
Too few are taught in person to keep it from slipping into obscurity. Even more so, too few are good enough to fold from looking at a finished model.

I hear this argument enough that I've created a form letter to respond to it. Here it is:

I have always had a hard time understanding this particular sentiment. I
think origami is the only art form where artists are expected to make
instructions for how to duplicate their work. Should all painters then be
expected to make paint-by-numbers kits for their works? How come we don't
think of van Gogh's (or pick your own favourite painter) work dying because
there are no instructions on how to make them? Of course, I'm not in the
same league as van Gogh, but I'm sure you get my meaning.

Diagrams have their place. They are a useful tool for transmitting ideas,
and for getting people started in the art. There comes a time, however, when
it becomes just so much routine puzzle-solving. There's no art there. "Oh, I
just figured out how to make Kamiya's dragon. It was rough going through
steps 73-88, but I managed to finish it!" Yes, there's pride in that
accomplishment, but isn't it better to figure out how to make a dragon of
your own?

I'd much rather see more books like KASAHARA Kunihiko's "Creative Origami",
JC Nolan's "Creating Origami", and Robert Lang's "Origami Design Secrets"
than yet another book of models. Books like Michael LaFosse's "Origamido"
and the Mingei Museum's "Origami Masterworks" are also good because they
have few instructions; the photos serve as inspiration and they focus on the
true artistry of origami.

Yes, many designs will be lost when artists die. This is a good thing. It
makes their work unique. It makes them special. And it also cans serve to
inspire new artists to create masterpieces of their own. Too often I get
people asking for diagrams because they want to make a "Wu" design. Wouldn't
it be much better to make a "you" design instead?

Happy folding!

A suggestion.
If nothing else, consider videotaping the folding session. There are many ways to document & preserve the process for the world & our children's children.

I do document some of my designs, but typically the notes are not going to be understandable by anyone but me. I write down just enough for me to recreate a design, which means that most of it is still just in my memory. Sometimes I don't write anything down, but I will fold extra copies so I can reverse engineer them later if necessary. And, yes, there are times when I videotape myself folding. But like I said in my form letter, I don't think it's a great loss if a particular design gets "lost".

Lastly,
Thank you for sharing your designs. They are the subject of much interest.

You're welcome, and thank you.

[wolf]

...musings of a great artist...

Amen to that! I'm going to start referring diagram-begging people to this thread.

What you learn from diagrams/CPs/lessons are just the tools and techniques of the business. The experience is undoubtedly valuable, but all that makes you is a great craftsman, not a great artist. Both are equally worthy goals, so it boils down to whether you'd rather be an engineer or an architect. Or are you one of the few who can be both...?

[Joseph Wu]

...musings of a great artist...

Musings: yes, definitely.
Artist: thank you. That's a compliment.
Great: I don't think I can accept this one just yet, though. Maybe after I'm dead...

[malachi]

I just want to preface this by saying that I have a lot of respect for you, Mr. Wu, and I think that you have done a lot for origami. However, I am inclined to respectfully disagree with a couple of your points.

I think origami is the only art form where artists are expected to make instructions for how to duplicate their work.

I take it you don't consider music to be art?

Diagrams have their place. They are a useful tool for transmitting ideas, and for getting people started in the art. There comes a time, however, when it becomes just so much routine puzzle-solving. There's no art there. "Oh, I just figured out how to make Kamiya's dragon. It was rough going through steps 73-88, but I managed to finish it!" Yes, there's pride in that accomplishment, but isn't it better to figure out how to make a dragon of your own?

Better is relative.

I think you are ignoring a part of the paperfolding community that might be quite large. There are people that fold paper that do not aspire to design at all, and there are others that aspire to design, but it is a very low priority. Just like many people learn to play a musical instrument yet have no interest in writing music, they simply wish to reproduce the work of others that they enjoy.

I'm not saying that you are obligated to document your designs. I understand your unwillingness to do so. I just think that there are many people who are not interested enough in design to be inspired by lack of diagrams. From my point of view, this part of your argument is a little weak.

For you, origami is an art of creation. For many others origami is a craft of skillful reproduction. I think both have a place.

[wolf]

Just like many people learn to play a musical instrument yet have no interest in writing music, they simply wish to reproduce the work of others that they enjoy.

I would argue that the situation in music is somewhat different. Musical compositions can be easily recorded and distributed. Thus, there is ample opportunity for a third party to reverse engineer the composition and then produce a score for others to play (let's leave the legalities of this out at this point). And with a frequency analyser, the reverse engineering process can be done with a computer, with possibly even more precision than what a human ear can achieve.

In origami, particularly for more complex designs, such duplication and reverse engineering is much, much harder to do. Often, only a few specimens of a particular model exist, and I don't think designers would be willing to fold lots more duplicates just to distribute to others. There's also no guarantee that the reverse engineered design contains the same internal crease structure as the original.