The Origami Forum

I am wondering what the number value (eg. Ryu-jin 3.5) is that people use these days?
Why is it Ryu-jin 3.5? Does the 3 mean it is the 3rd Ryu-jin, but a different base than 1 and 2. And does the .5 mean it is the 5th set of changes made to the 3rd Ryu-jin?
If that is the case, how does one stipulate the date that the model was designed? Eg. would Ryu-jin 3.5 have the same design date as Ryu-jin 3.1? Or would the design date be the date that the 5th set of changes were made?
I hope my question makes sence!

Well I guess it's about the same as with versions of computer programs.

1.1 ---> 1.2 = minor design change / bug fixes

1.2 ---> 2.0 = major design change

Of course, the border between a minor and a major design change is not quite clear and left to the designer to decide.

If you were to continue the programming example you could also number the various models you've folded of a specific version as different "builds", so that 1.1.1 is the first actual model you've folded of version 1.1, and 1.1.2 the second model you folded from the same version.
But I've not seen anyone do this so far

Also in my opinion the design date would be definitely the date, that this specific version was designed, so 1.2 has a different design date than 1.1 or 1.0.

As I understand it, the first number is usually what the actual overall design is. The number after the decimal point is the minor edits and tweaking made to the particular design.

More simply put, version 4.2 and version 4.7 would have the same crease pattern, but would be finished off differently. While versions 1.4 and 6.2 would have different CPs.

I think that's how it works, anyhow. Also, if you just slightly change the reference points, but keep the same basic CP/structure/packing, that is still just a variation or tweaking.

So if I made elephant 3.2, that would mean it was my third differently designed elephant, and my second variation.

And if I were dating my designs, it would be the date that version 3.2 was designed, not 3.1. Of course at most I usually just get the date down to the correct month.

So that's how it works?

For a model I create, I've always started with version 1.0 and then increase the number with each change I make to the model, the increase being how big of a change it was.

origamimasterjared wrote:As I understand it, the first number is usually what the actual overall design is. The number after the decimal point is the minor edits and tweaking made to the particular design.

More simply put, version 4.2 and version 4.7 would have the same crease pattern, but would be finished off differently. While versions 1.4 and 6.2 would have different CPs.

Another version I've seen around is using "Opus." Which basically means, every time something is changed the number goes up by one. Robert Lang uses that method to number his models.

The difference is, that using "opus" you can't really tell if it's a completely new model or if it's a refinement of an earlier model, since there is no correlation between the numbers.
Opus (x) and Opus (x+1) can (and in most cases will be) completely different models.

I'd be more than happy though to have CPs for all of the 500+ opera/opuses by Lang

Of course. I wouldn't mind either!
It would be kind of interesting though to see a progression of the models, sort of like the one shown for Roman Diaz's Hippocampus.

Of course, I have one model that uses the x.x numbering in its name, but that has nothing to do with the revision number. I speak, of course, of Dragon 5.5 which is made of five-and-a-half squares of paper.

Joseph, now that's another way of doing it!
Nowadays people are using circles and other shapes in origami. How would you numerically describe a model made from 3 squares and a circle? 3.O?

I've never really understood these systems, but thats mainly because its very rare that I refold a model, other than for diagramming or photo purposes. I should, but I just never do.
I use numbers only for signifying the difference between models with the same name that are different. Mask and Mask 2 on my blog have completely different CPs from each other, and the only thing that they really have in common is the subject.

I could use that numbering system...I think it might be useful to keep track of revisions and to show people what kind of changes I went through, if they were interested. I find that my models get a lot better if I refold them, even if I use (essentially) the same design. I will always do a test version first to make sure the design works well before folding another one.

Here is a quick example I put together from a design I am currently working on:

Future Soldier

Version 1.0


CP:


Version 1.3


CP:


Version 1.4


CP:


(Note-the shield is a lot bigger than it looks in the pics-it is just at an angle. Also, this guy has a jetpack on his back in all 3 versions.)

I added comments to the photos explaining the changes, so you can visit my Flickr page if you want to know more about them.

EDIT: Added CPs.