origamimasterjared wrote:Thin papers tend to not fold very well unless treated. The thin papers have very little sizing, which is what not only holds the fibers together (I assume not much is needed for such light fibers), but also allows you to fold it. To get something like mulberry tissue fold-ready, you should probably backcoat it with another piece, or saturate it with methyl-cellulose, and let it dry. You should then be able to fold it dry. It's not that it's not strong enough; it's not crisp enough.
From my limited experience with it, gampi (while very expensive--~$15 a sheet) will fold without adding anything. Still, adding MC later in the folding process can work wonders for thin things like antennae, antlers, insect legs, etc.
Preparing paper as you have suggested does not violate the rules of origami. Adding MC "later in the folding process", however, smells suspiciously like gluing to me.
If you're against gluing in that sense, then okay. But I really think the no-gluing thing really just applies to gluing parts together (Modulars should hold together without glue, BUT you should still use glue to make it sturdy, because if you drop it, you're screwed). For instance folding antlers from a separate sheet and then gluing them on. Look up papercraft. That is exactly what happens if rather than placing the major emphasis on the folding, you give equal weight to coloring, folding, cutting, and gluing.
Adding glue/MC the way Robert Lang, Satoshi Kamiya, Jason Ku, Brian Chan, Ben Muller, I, and many others do is really more akin to making the perfect paper. If I'm making a sea urchin, then I know I want the whole thing to have a lot of MC. But if I'm making an elk, I may only want to do that for the antlers and legs, because the body should be broad and fairly bulky compared to those parts. It's just a whole lot easier and more effective to do later in the folding process.
Ok guys. I'm a bit out of my league here, coz I never even used MC before. But I have to agree with origamimasterjared here. What is the difference between adding mc afterwards and adding water afterwards when wet-folding. Sometimes only a part of the model needs water, so is that then also cheating/glueing?
And I also think that these techniques (wet-folding, foil-backing, mc, etc) have evolutionised origami. Without that we would still be folding one dimensional, simple figures!!
I am an origami purist, and I guess that places me in the minority. I believe that 1) all folds should start with a square, 2) it should be possible to completely unfold a finished model back to that original square (this rules out cutting and gluing), and 3) the resulting pattern should contain only distinct creases (no "crumpled" areas.)
I agree that violating these rules often results in cool looking models, but it is not something that I personally would ever do. Also, if my work should be compared to someone else's, I want to know that we were both subject to the same restrictions.
A person might be able to write a better sounding poem by adding an extra line or changing the number of syllables, but the result cannot be called Haiku.
Perhaps a new category should be invented for models that use gluing, wet folding, sculpting, etc. "folded paper sculpture" seems like a good term.
Each artist uses the techniques he or she likes the most. Where's the problem in using MC if you like?, or where's the problem in not using?.
Feel free for using the techniques, but I encourage you all to try new ways.
By the way, wet folding is in some way a non origami purist technique, becuase it adds water, and models lies hard after they dry, so you can't unfold to the orignial square.
JVega wrote:
By the way, wet folding is in some way a non origami purist technique, becuase it adds water, and models lies hard after they dry, so you can't unfold to the orignial square.
Agreed. If I ever try it (which I might just for the sake of learning something new), I will either not show the result to people or take pains to explain how it differs from pure origami. I have folded a few models from rectangles and triangles, and I always make a point of disclosing that fact when I show them. I will never even try gluing or cutting, as these techniques are too far over the line for me. If the final step in creating a model is "shape by pinching", I always skip it.
Well of course. If I fold something from a paper that I heavily saturated with methyl cellulose I say "folded from x paper heavily saturated with methyl cellulose." It's simply part of the materials used. Painters say what kind of paint they used, origami artists should say their paper. No matter what it is (Except maybe origami paper, since that is very obvious). If I fold one of my few modulars and take it to convention, I would probably want to glue it for stability, so that it doesn't fall apart on the way there, or if it gets dropped or anything. I would say "Folded from n squares. Holds together without glue....But since I didn't want it to fall apart when they were checking my baggage at the airport, glue was added for stability.
I gues something that is related to this topic is to see it purely from a designer's point of view. Anything is foldable in theory, but not quite in practice, mainly due to the restrictions caused by the paper. As I've said, I'm not a professional folder. For me the fun lies in designing. And when I design a model, it is not designed for a specific type of paper or technique. I think ideally a model should be designed to be folded by any (or most anyway) type of paper. And that is how I design my stuff.
The last thing you want is to be on the 147th step of folding a model and then realising that it's gonna look like %$3@! because you used the wrong paper to start off with! Obviously size, colour and thickness matters. So I think different strokes for different folks! Nobody is wrong here! And yes, I too dont fold/design anything that is not "pure", as described in the previous posts.
qtrollip wrote:I think ideally a model should be designed to be folded by any (or most anyway) type of paper. And that is how I design my stuff.
I am always pleased to se a designer think about the folding process as well as the finished result. Montroll/Lang's Origami Sealife is particularly impressive in that regard.
I know that I ran across a website with 13" squares of origami paper a while back, but was short on money at the time. Now it is driving me nuts that I can't find it (a short drive.) Has anybody seen it?
I am still having problems working with foil paper. The biggest issue is its resistance to reverse folding. This is unfortunate, as it has some properties (notably remaining thin when a lot of layers are stacked and holding detail creases well) that make it excellent for complex models.
Do you folks have any tips/techniques for working with foil paper that you have learned from experience?
When I'm folding with tissue foil and need to make a mountain into a valley, I find that just running your finger down the crease and flattening it completely makes it easier to reverse it. However, I can relate what you're talking about and its always going to be one of the cons of tissue foil. Everything has it pros and cons.
GreyGeese wrote:I am still having problems working with foil paper. The biggest issue is its resistance to reverse folding. This is unfortunate, as it has some properties (notably remaining thin when a lot of layers are stacked and holding detail creases well) that make it excellent for complex models.
Do you folks have any tips/techniques for working with foil paper that you have learned from experience?
Foil paper, like the kind you buy pre-packaged? Reversing is the easiest thing to do with it. What's hard is unsinks. And unsinks are almost impossible with tissue-foil. And open sinks are no party for tissue-foil either.
Advice for working with foil: Don't squeeze or pinch anything ever. At the end you can do some gentle curving if you want, but you will still get the best results with clean folds.
Best advice: Use the white side of the foil as the colored side. It takes a while to get used to, but it gives much better results. When a diagram shows the white side up, that is the foil side. You will get much better results that way.
