Origami Forum Design Group

Sadarac · Post by **Sadarac** » December 5th, 2009, 11:32 pm

I think that the "feeling" of the piece should be in its posture. We could focus on the way the vampire stands. (maybe have it look like its running after a target. give it a "flowing" cape?) That way we can keep the face simple( maybe just eyes and fangs?) and still have something that looks awsome. As to how to actually fold it, diagonal symmatry might work.

I think that once we finish the design we should diagram (or draw a CP if it gets too complex for diagrams) it and include a "history" of how it was designed.

Its great to have you guys on board:)

petr-stuchly · Post by **petr-stuchly** » December 6th, 2009, 3:01 am

have you guys noticed how this topic started to be active? good news only!

if i can agree with Jon, i think for a caped vampire a book symetry would be easier and more effective to create the cape.
it's great idea with the posture of it!
if we wanted an extremely simplified version, we can make it standing and with one hand over face wrapping himself in cape. we could ommit the cacial details at all and still get an interesting and impressive model, but i am metodicálly a man of detail, so take this only as an idea, because no matter the pose, i want mine to have facial details

and creepy bony long fingers with kind of clawy nails

will we design one model together or will we use this threat only as an "idea source" and fold own model (each of us)?
because this is an important point.

to end up with something, the pose is really important and it's great someone pointed it up

there are plenty of possible poses so we can feel free to experiment

Sadarac · Post by **Sadarac** » December 6th, 2009, 7:41 am

I think that we should each tackle individual elements of the piece after we know what we want it to look like, then put the pieces together. Unless there is a more efficent way:)

Jonnycakes · Post by **Jonnycakes** » December 6th, 2009, 8:04 am

You can try that approach if you like, but don't expect anything resembling a finished design to come out it. A very important part of origami design-at least as important as the structure of each individual part-is how those parts fit together. You guys can try to come up with different parts, but they will probably not fit together well at all, especially if (and when) different people use different design strategies, structures and techniques. The decision to use a certain structure for a certain part is directly related to what structures you use for other parts, since they need to fit together in the end. Pleats for the fingers? The pleats need to end somewhere-you can't just haphazardly toss limbs together and get a finished product.

petr-stuchly · Post by **petr-stuchly** » December 6th, 2009, 2:41 pm

Jon is right as always

Sadarac · Post by **Sadarac** » December 6th, 2009, 7:15 pm

Well then, maybe each person tries to design it after everyone discusses what to make it look like?

topsu · Post by **topsu** » December 9th, 2009, 6:44 am

That could be a good idea.

Not sure if this is already asked, but since the cape is pleated, will the body be, too? Box pleating is hard to fold cleanly and many people think it's 'boring' (It's okay to me, but I don't like folding grids)

Jonnycakes · Post by **Jonnycakes** » December 9th, 2009, 5:19 pm

Actually, box pleating, depending on the complexity, tends to be easier than using 22.5 degree structures, mostly because of the ease of folding middle flaps. It is easier to fold waterbombs and pleat-sink them than to fold bird bases. That aside, it is very possible for the cape to be the only "box-pleated" element. The rest of it just needs to be based on different structures. And if you have a different way of folding the cape and it works, then go for it!

Adam · Post by **Adam** » December 9th, 2009, 6:03 pm

Sadarac wrote:Well then, maybe each person tries to design it after everyone discusses what to make it look like?

But then what's the point of having this group at all, if people are designing things on their own anyway? Perhaps you could discuss possible designs using something like Google Wave, where you can all jointly work - at the same time - on obtaining a single crease pattern?

Post by **origami_8** » December 9th, 2009, 6:37 pm

Google Wave sounds like a good idea for this design group. You could use the drawing gadget (VectorEditor) to create stick figures and later on Crease Patterns or diagrams and see in real time what the others do.
The main problem will be to invite all members.

Sadarac · Post by **Sadarac** » December 10th, 2009, 3:43 am

THat sounds great:) if someone wants to set it up(i dont know how

) then have members post (or pm) there gmails and we could get going on this:)

Harpseal · Post by **Harpseal** » December 22nd, 2011, 3:52 pm

Origami SD is free, easy to get (http://www.angelfire.com/or3/tklorigami0/) but a bit on the challenging side to use. Designing is probably my strength in origami so if this kicks off, I will be part of it (subject to change, dependent of terms and conditions and I will set my own once seeing yours).

Harpseal · Post by **Harpseal** » January 1st, 2012, 5:21 pm

ok, yeah, origami SD takes practice. I am now much better with it but it is quite hard. You also need GS view for the post script files it churns out.

cowburger13 · Post by **cowburger13** » April 25th, 2012, 1:07 am

Sounds like fun! is it still available to do?

Harpseal · Post by **Harpseal** » April 25th, 2012, 8:03 am

No idea. Hoping to get adobe for my birthday, i bet i won't, although i did tell everyone i asked it was for origami diagrams. Anyway, i've fallen in love with diagonal box pleating, so if i am needed to design something, i will use that. See my fireflower for a very basic example (2nd arf url, somewhere high up)

The Origami Forum

Origami Forum Design Group

oh well

Re: Origami Forum Design Group

Re: Origami Forum Design Group

Re: Origami Forum Design Group

Re: Origami Forum Design Group