Does Pure Origami belong to regular square only?

InsomniacFolder · Post by **InsomniacFolder** » February 17th, 2009, 3:15 pm

Everyone glues these days, they they just call it size, re-sizing or CMC etc instead.

It's still a tool to get your paper to hold a shape that it otherwise wouldn't.

I don't see why that is acceptable, and non-squares aren't.

But, then again, I'm happy to fold rectangles and other shapes, but they're just not as pleasing to work with somehow as a square.

(If we were super super clever, the models design would account for the excess required in each layer to take the desired shape created by the size - and use pleaqts and crimps to engineer each part in to place. Sculpting with glue is much much easier though. Also, the asymmetry that would produce all over the place is too much - at the moment - for origami design to master with it's most complex models.
If anybody understands the contents of these parentheses, well done!)

orion119net · Post by **orion119net** » February 17th, 2009, 11:40 pm

Personally I think that "pure" origami consists of just one square of paper, no cutting.

but I don't have a problem with gluing to hold a model together(like, if the model is an open belly, you can glue it shut to keep it from spazzing out). After all, you can do almost the same thing with wetfolding.

I also don't have a problem with folding from other shapes, like a hexagon, or rectangle.

94JED · Post by **94JED** » February 18th, 2009, 3:27 am

I think that it should be one square, no cutting nor gluing (just because I think it's annoying to work with)
But then again, some models like Sipho Mabona's Fugu that uses glue, I have to admit, it's worth the glue.
And some models like Robert J. Lang's cucko clock or Mr. Kiminha's Ninja Shadow, it's worth the long strip.
In that sence I must admit that it's ok to use glue or a long strip, because they are great models, and if they were made with a square or no glue, i think that they would have a far more appreciation.
For example, the other day I found a diagram of a pill bug made with a long strip of paper, it was beautiful; then, when I saw Lang's pillbug made with one square, I gave that model a far greater appreciation. The same would be with Mabona's Fugu...
Now, cutting, I think It's not origami, I think if you like cutting you should try kirigami (art of cutting paper) . I mean, imagine how easy it would be to make an insect just by cutting and making the legs, no fun!

So I think that if the model is to be truly appreciated, it should be with a square and no glue. But if it does need a rare shape of paper, or needs glue, it should be a damm good model (sorry for the dirty language), such as the ones mentioned before.

helliluya · Post by **helliluya** » February 18th, 2009, 6:03 am

Although I chose 3 "Take it easy and fold what you want." , personally I like to fold models that start with single uncut square.

Its just my personal preference

chesslo · Post by **chesslo** » February 18th, 2009, 9:07 am

SQUARE FTW( For the win) i think only origami made from square is defined as "pure"...

Ben385 · Post by **Ben385** » February 18th, 2009, 5:58 pm

I think that squares are the only way forward. If you have to star from a different shape, manipulate the square instead of cutting. Reference points aren't that hard to find.

Silent Winter · Post by **Silent Winter** » February 25th, 2009, 3:44 am

If I take a newspaper (that is printed on large squares), I open it up and remove the front page; then fold it back together while keeping the front page separate… Have I purified the front page of the newspaper?