Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

General discussion about Origami, Papers, Diagramming, ...
bethnor
Buddha
Posts: 1313
Joined: August 17th, 2006, 9:57 pm

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by bethnor »

Bubo wrote:Why not let them discuss it?
of course they're free to discuss it--as free as i am to be derisive about it.
Although it depends on your meaning of improve I think it's demonstrably false that adding more scales, claws, teeth etc "doesn't improve [a] model at all". Is Lang's tree frog with toes not an improvement on the traditional frog?
no. it is only a more complex frog.
Is not Lang's koi with scales not an improvement on his koi without scales?
no. it is only a more complex koi.
If your trying to say that more scales, claws etc doesn't NECESSARILY improve a model you'd be correct - and it's hard to conceive of how Kamiya's Ryu Zin could be improved. To suggest that looking at how to add more detail, without compromising unduly aesthetics, should be abandoned is narrow minded IMO.
the conclusion that you and many of these younger folders are implying, that more complex = improved, is in fact a demonstrably false one. and distressing for reasons i outlined in earlier posts. as andrey just proved in tanteidan 17, and with the dragon i linked, there is always someone who can add more detail with a grid that is large enough. this is admirable as a feat of engineering and design, but not always from an aesthetic one.

for instance, the kamiya styracosaurus 2.0 adds nothing to 1.0. he captured the essence of the model in 1.0 with its crown of horns. toes didn't really add anything aesthetically. to me, the lang kois are both the same aesthetically, but the "simpler" mabona koi is far more aesthetically pleasing. this is even easier to demonstrate with super complex butterflies, which are to a one, quite ugly compared to a lafosse butterfly. they are impressive as designs, but the ugliness derives from the bulk generated by creating the legs and antennae necessarily drawing the eye away from the butterfly's most interesting (and distinctive) feature--their delicate wings. the "simpler" lang buttery in OI2 looks quite a bit better than the the "complex" one in OI1, the latter of which, with its blocky wings and ultra thick body resembles something cybernetic instead of organic.

the thought process that is ongoing in the community, that more complex "makes for a tastier burger," is by far the smaller minded one, IMO, and causes great artists in our very midst (grizzly man, juston, just to name two) to be overlooked all the time.
phillipcurl
Moderator
Posts: 1657
Joined: October 25th, 2011, 2:51 pm
Location: Senoia, GA
Contact:

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by phillipcurl »

Like the guy above me is saying, the more complex doesn't mean that is improved or better. If the folder is smart they maybe can make the complex model look good, but most of the time, overcomplicating doesn't look good. it makes the model very thick and sometimes very ugly if the folder doesn't fold accurately. Personally, i like some of the "simpler" models better, example, i like ryujin 1.2 better than ryujin 3.1 or 2.1 though i like 3.5 a lot. Kamiya is a great example of making use of the thickness of the model and the flaps.
Anyway, but on topic, I do not think that Kamiya will be making a Ryujin 4.0. What is there to add? The point of this model is to be an eastern dragon, so he wouldn't go and add wings or something like that.
flickr gallery
Youtube channel
Phillip
rdrutel
Super Member
Posts: 150
Joined: November 6th, 2007, 11:38 pm

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by rdrutel »

Man I have not been here in a while but this stuff is bringing me back! I was always on the dark side too!! So lets keep it going. I think that everyone has been asked "what is it?" and been upset that their model was not recognized. I think simplification takes us more in that direction. The problem with simplification is that it is finite. You end up with the abstract square. Complicating things is infinite and adding articulations in my opinion will always be an improvement as long as the addition looks like what it is supposed to and makes the model appear closer to the ideal. And of course, the ideal is in the eye of the beholder.
User avatar
Axel´s Origami
Senior Member
Posts: 286
Joined: July 18th, 2011, 9:19 pm
Location: sweden

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by Axel´s Origami »

Ok people, this is how I see it:

Complex does not always equal good. However, it is often very impresive.
Simple does not always equal good. However, it is often very impresive.

Complex does not always equal bad. However, it can be bad somtimes.
Simple does not always equal bad. However, it can be bad somtimes.

Awesomnes and impesivenes of a model is subjective.
There is no such thing as objective awesomnes and/or impressivenes (unless you're religious, then god(s) is probably objectivly awesome and/or impresive (but I'm not gonna start some sh!t about religion here, I dont want to get banhammered))

Y'all need to see the Twillight Zone episode "Eye of the Beholder"!
Bubo
Junior Member
Posts: 80
Joined: August 19th, 2011, 8:29 am

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by Bubo »

I put "necessarily" in caps for a reason. No one with any sense would argue that more complexity = better or that Kamiya > Dinh. I'd agree that many complex butterflies are far less appealing that the leg less ones of La Fosse and others. But to suggest that Lang's scaled koi is not better in every sense that could be relevant beggars believe. It is not "only" more complex - it also improves on the model aesthetically, adds a layer of realism and demonstrates a valuable designing principle. Is Dinh's sleeping dog "only" a more simple dog? My point was that all on this forum should be allowed to appreciate, and express our appreciation, or desire, for whichever forms of origami appeal to us, be it complex, simple or both without being jumped on and derided. It is entirely valid for one person to appreciate only complex models if they so desire, just as it is equally valid for someone to appreciate only "simple" models. In my opinion both positions are narrow minded and I have never "implied" anything other than this.
bethnor
Buddha
Posts: 1313
Joined: August 17th, 2006, 9:57 pm

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by bethnor »

Bubo wrote:But to suggest that Lang's scaled koi is not better in every sense that could be relevant beggars believe. It is not "only" more complex - it also improves on the model aesthetically, adds a layer of realism and demonstrates a valuable designing principle.
it hardly beggars belief. i agree it demonstrates a valuable designing principle, but i fail to see why it is aesthetically better. no fish i know looks like a tessellation.
Is Dinh's sleeping dog "only" a more simple dog? My point was that all on this forum should be allowed to appreciate, and express our appreciation, or desire, for whichever forms of origami appeal to us, be it complex, simple or both without being jumped on and derided. It is entirely valid for one person to appreciate only complex models if they so desire, just as it is equally valid for someone to appreciate only "simple" models. In my opinion both positions are narrow minded and I have never "implied" anything other than this.
of course everyone can admire complex models, but this queer obsession with the ryu-zin and trying to make it more complex is just that--bizarre. why the ryu-zin instead of one of the dozen other scaled eastern dragons that are in the field, other than a bizarre obsession with all things kamiya? why the ryu-zin, other than the fact that it's considered the holy grail of origami by many? and i'm sorry, you and others have implied it without directly saying it, it is a longstanding, ongoing trend about how complexity is better (MOAR INSECTS!!! MANTIS SHRIMP COMPLETE WITH CLAWS, LEGS AND TAIL BASED ON 96X96 GRID DOESN'T COUNT), and just as you're free to enjoy that in this forum, i am free to comment on it.
anonymous person
Senior Member
Posts: 437
Joined: April 14th, 2010, 11:54 am
Location: London

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by anonymous person »

For me, David Brill's essay summarises brilliantly everything I was going to say in this post.
Bubo
Junior Member
Posts: 80
Joined: August 19th, 2011, 8:29 am

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by Bubo »

Bethnor you continue to misinterpret and misrepresent my comments. I have never said "complexity is better" - why did I make reference to Dinh twice in my last post? I have said complexity can be better (and backed it up with examples - fish have scales, to represent them with a tessellation is aesthetically pleasing to me and I would expect the vast majority of origami afficionados, yourself being the only exclusion I have heard of).

People's obsession with Kamiya stems from a few simple principles.
1. His models are complex, realistic, elegant, remarkable (and for pete's sake I am not saying others aren't)
2. Unlike most other complex folders he diagrams many models making him more accessible - i.e he can be emulated with gives people a sense of achievement rather than just appreciation.
3. The quality of his diagrams is exceptional.
It is just human nature that he is rightly or wrongly idolised. I don't idolise him has the "greatest of folders and designers" but until someone else meets his quality, regularity and complexity I will "idolise" him as the "greatest" of diagrammers.

So you don't like Andrey's Mantis shrimp? Well I love it - with the right paper it is a very complex AND realistic AND aesthetically pleasing representation of a life form that I wasn't even aware of before it was folded from paper.

Your free to express your opinions Bethnor, as I am, and in any manner you choose I guess but your approach is heavy handed. You seem exasperated that others don't think like you do - perhaps you should spend sometime trying to understand why others think the way they do and accept that origami is big enough for a wide variety of positions to be EQUALLY valid.
bethnor
Buddha
Posts: 1313
Joined: August 17th, 2006, 9:57 pm

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by bethnor »

Bubo wrote: You seem exasperated that others don't think like you do - perhaps you should spend sometime trying to understand why others think the way they do and accept that origami is big enough for a wide variety of positions to be EQUALLY valid.
you say this, and then you say this
But to suggest that Lang's scaled koi is not better in every sense that could be relevant beggars believe.
so i guess views are equal unless they are mine, which just beggar belief?

i understand perfectly well how others are thinking here, as they've made no secret about it, though you like to try and dodge that they are being perfectly plain that it's the complexity they want, even as if it serves no purpose at all other than complexity for complexity sake, which couldn't be more true than trying to conceive of ways to make the ryu-zin more complex. you also have completely missed the point that i have repeatedly made that this wish is futile, because it is inevitable that someone will eventually design something more complex, which they have and will.

and i didn't say you didn't like the mantis shrimp. but you made it clear that it didn't count for arthropod purposes, when it is again, proof that sooner or later, someone with a grid that is large enough will make something more complex.
2. Unlike most other complex folders he diagrams many models making him more accessible
and he will never diagram the ryu-zin, so there is even less chance that there will diagrams for a more complex version of it, hence my enough. i don't think it's healthy to keep wishing for something that will never happen, and i do think it does real harm by distracting people from other talent, as i have repeatedly said. people are perfectly free to continue their wishes aloud, but i am going to continue to say if i find those wishes absurd.
fish have scales, to represent them with a tessellation is aesthetically pleasing to me and I would expect the vast majority of origami afficionados
here you make a bizarre argumentum ad populum. why should the presence of scales on a fish necessarily make it aesthetically pleasing to the vast majority? how is it that you have been appointed the speaker for this vast majority? i don't find the addition of scales makes it better because while scales are a property of all fish, they are not what is most distinctive about koi. when i think of koi, i think of their bright colors, their sleek contour, their almost mammalian drive when they recognize their owners and swim towards them during feeding time.

Image

Image

one of these emphasizes the sleek contour of the koi and its bright colors, while the other does not. even though one of them clearly violates a purist rule that would make many in this thread pull out their hair. if scales makes you think of koi, that's fine, but i'm going to disagree.
Argonaut
Super Member
Posts: 225
Joined: July 1st, 2011, 6:31 pm
Location: the island of misfit toys

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by Argonaut »

I, for one, think the koi with scales looks better.

My problem with the anti-complexity mentality is that they take Eric Joisel's comments and take them too far. Eric Joisel means that when you sacrifice aesthetics for more detail, that's bad. That doesn't mean you should reject adding details to models. In the case of the koi, it makes the model far more impressive. In general, more complicated models are more impressive to view.

Also, the only reason the first koi would be better is due to the addition of paint, not any folding skill.
Eat. Sleep. Fold Paper.
phillipcurl
Moderator
Posts: 1657
Joined: October 25th, 2011, 2:51 pm
Location: Senoia, GA
Contact:

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by phillipcurl »

WITHOUT paint, the scaled koi looks better aesthetically. WITH paint, the unscaled koi looks better. Without it, the model isn't ugly, but it isn't very attractive either compared to the scaled.
flickr gallery
Youtube channel
Phillip
Bubo
Junior Member
Posts: 80
Joined: August 19th, 2011, 8:29 am

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by Bubo »

Ordinarily I would have left it at my last post but I feel my comments are still being misrepresented. I compared Lang's scaled koi with Lang's unscaled koi to point out that complexity CAN improve a model. I have never said it is the ONLY way a model can be improved. Yes, Mabona's and LaFosse's Koi are excellent in there own way and I can readily accept if some one believes them to be better than Lang's (this is art were discussing after all) - that does not make my point that complexity can improve a model incorrect. Bethnor I find it revealing that you chose to emphasise the "every sense" part of my earlier comment rather than the "could be relevant" part. I was not trying to dictate beliefs rather I was trying to say that I cannot conceive how someone could consider Lang's unscaled koi to be better than his scaled - you certainly haven't addressed this point.

I'm not dodging anything. In another thread I explained, with reasons and examples, why I and (I assume from their comments) others appreciate and want complexity. Nobody has said they want complexity just for the sake of it. Complexity can improve a model in many ways and add to the enjoyment of folding. It can also be unnecessary and ugly - butterflies with legs being an excellent example.

I have never raised mantis shrimp models before my previous post in this thread - so what did you mean by my not counting it for "arthropod purposes"?

Who said Kamiya will diagram Ry-Zin? Certainly not me. What I did say was that "it is hard to conceive how Ryu Zin could be improved". Wishing for that is probably pointless if not unhealthy - it has been several years since Ryu Zin 3.5. But I first spoke up to defend the right of people to dream - I didn't yell "ENOUGH"

Perhaps I am guilty of "ad populum" - but how else are we to judge if one piece of art is an improvement over another. Note however my use of the words "I would expect" - I have not pretended to be the speaker for the majority but I do listen and read. I was here reading the posts when the model first appeared. I have heard the gasps when Lang has presented this model to audiences. My "expectation" is based on these observations and is quite a reasonable extrapolation from this data (does anyone have any other data?). Once again I said it was aesthetically more pleasing relative to his unscaled Koi - because it adds a layer of realism and people appreciate the time, effort and cleverness at using a tessellation to represent scales. At the time Lang's scaled Koi came out such tessellations for scales were not common place or as ingenious as this particular one.

Your points about what you think about Koi are good and its good that artists like LaFosse and Mabona have indeed captured that essence. But frankly from the two photo's you included I can't see any real difference in shape or shaping between Lang's and Lafosse's. What I do see is a difference between the use of extra applied colours (nothing wrong with that per se for me - I'm no purist), different backgrounds and different angles for photography (perhaps chosen by the artists to emphasise different aspects). But I'll agree that Lafosse has captured the essence of koi to a greater degree than Lang. But is origami only about representing an "essence"? Not for me - it is that, but it is also more. My key point is that we don't have to put down one area of Origami to appreciate another.
phillipcurl
Moderator
Posts: 1657
Joined: October 25th, 2011, 2:51 pm
Location: Senoia, GA
Contact:

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by phillipcurl »

Well he will CLEARLY never diagram ryujin, MAYBE 1.2 or even 2.1 BUT NEVER 3.5! He said in his website it would take well over TEN YEARS WORKING NON STOP to diagram ryujin 3.5 and have more than 500-1000 steps. The diagram would take up one book! That means he practically would have dedicate the rest of his life to diagramming ryujin 3.5...
Please stop arguing, complex models are nice, so are simple models. no need for flame wars over this. you guys are acting like little children bickering over this.
flickr gallery
Youtube channel
Phillip
Bubo
Junior Member
Posts: 80
Joined: August 19th, 2011, 8:29 am

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by Bubo »

Hey phillipcurl. Don't fret. Neither Bethnor nor I are flaming each other. It's just a vigorous discussion between two differing view points. Were both probably missing some of each others points but there's no animosity, certainly not on my part and I haven't interpreted anything from Bethnor as a flame. I just want to defend those who wish to discuss complexity be they misguided or not. This thread was never intended to be about Ryu Zin diagrams - only pipe-dreams about what would be in a 4.0. As there was a 1.2, 2.1, 3.0, 3.5 speculating on a 4.0 is not unsurprising and shouldn't IMO be derided.
phillipcurl
Moderator
Posts: 1657
Joined: October 25th, 2011, 2:51 pm
Location: Senoia, GA
Contact:

Re: Will there be a Ryu Zin 4.0?

Post by phillipcurl »

but there is nothing to improve. knowing kamiya, he will add something, if he does make one though.
flickr gallery
Youtube channel
Phillip
Post Reply