Can I show these pictures to my friends on facebook? Please 
Gallery of Leo Lai(Update on 20100928)
Forum rules
READ: The Origami Forum Rules & Regulations
READ: The Origami Forum Rules & Regulations
-
philipinorigami101
- Super Member
- Posts: 161
- Joined: March 29th, 2010, 5:05 am
- Location: In my closet.
sigh.philipinorigami101 wrote:you know, that dragon almost looks like ryu jin. did you just use the ides of ryu jin?
i hate to be a broken record.
but once again.
the ryu-zin is not the beginning or end of origami.
it is not even the first "1000 scale" origami that was designed. i believe the joisel pangolin has that distinction. and i believe it was issei yosshino who first conceived of the pleated structure that one uses to generate such scales in his wild boar, even if they are folded a different way (but the general idea is to pleat, pull some layers apart, and sink to shape). even the derudas cobra predates the ryu-zin, and i'm not sure which came first, the ronald koh cobra or the derudas cobra. and i don't know if you know this, but there probably at least 3-4 other super complex eastern dragons with scales (at least 1 of which is filipino, btw, i think). leo lai could have based his/her dragon on any one of them; but is also clearly a talented enough designer such that he/could could have come up with it on their own.
i know i sound exasperated, and i know it's not intentional, and i'm sure leo lai has taken no offense, but i find this almost reflexive stance that kamiya is the entire origami story somewhat repetitive, however unintentional.
While I agree that there are other scaled models out there, what makes the Rju Zin special to me is the paper distribution. It's the only model I know that uses the two opposite sides of a square to create the illusion of length.
Furthermore the pleats are in unusual areas of the paper and not one big area like in the other mentioned models.
For your interest, the Koh Cobra is just a modification of the Derudas Cobra. I'm not sure about when the pangolin was designed, but I know the Rju Zin far longer. Even though there might be many equally detailed models nowadays, the Rju Zin still was one of the first ones around and therefore is special. It may not be the beginning nor the end of Origami, but I think it still deserves being mentioned as an ingenious and inspirational piece of Origami art.
Edit: According to Joisels homepage the Pangolin is from 2000 whereas according to Kamiya's homepage in 2000 he already had version 2.1 of Rju Zin. Furthermore I want to add that the scales for Rju Zin are completely different than those for the pangolin or the snakes.
Furthermore the pleats are in unusual areas of the paper and not one big area like in the other mentioned models.
For your interest, the Koh Cobra is just a modification of the Derudas Cobra. I'm not sure about when the pangolin was designed, but I know the Rju Zin far longer. Even though there might be many equally detailed models nowadays, the Rju Zin still was one of the first ones around and therefore is special. It may not be the beginning nor the end of Origami, but I think it still deserves being mentioned as an ingenious and inspirational piece of Origami art.
Edit: According to Joisels homepage the Pangolin is from 2000 whereas according to Kamiya's homepage in 2000 he already had version 2.1 of Rju Zin. Furthermore I want to add that the scales for Rju Zin are completely different than those for the pangolin or the snakes.
-
legionzilla
- Forum Sensei
- Posts: 902
- Joined: March 20th, 2009, 8:46 am
- Location: lolz...
anne--i didn't say that the ryu-zin is not worthy of special mention. in fact, i have said multiple times before that what is most interesting about it is the way that kamiya generates its length.
however, i think it's very unfair to other artists to automatically think that something they created is kamiya-inspired, as it does indeed suggest that kamiya and his works are the center of origami. are we really gonna ask every artist who designs a super complex eastern dragon now if it was derived from the ryu-zin? i don't think that's intentional by any means, but it's also ridiculous.
this actual gallery is only 3 pages long. a minimum--a BARE minimum--of lurking demonstrates that leo lai uses modulars, and does not strictly adhere to using a square (the cp for his cello is on page 2...). so even though i am not a designer, i can intuit that his dragon may therefore also be modular, and may not be derived from a square--which very quickly differentiates it from the ryu-zin. and even before legionzilla made his post, i was going to say that, aesthetically, this dragon is much closer in appearance to kade chen's than to the ryu-zin. and even if you weren't aware that kade chen had an eastern dragon, the head of this eastern dragon is much closer in design to the head of his own ki-rin than it is to the ryu-zin.
i know this seems like cranky admonishment for new posters, but i would rather think of it as encouragement to go outside the world of kamiya. there is a ton of talent out there, lai inclusive. that should be self-evident by his own designs. me personally, i would prefer diagrams to his cellist over kamiya's ryu-zin (the cello is my favorite stringed instrument). i encourage new posters to go to nicolas terry's twitter, and visit the flickr account of all the myriad of talented designers.
also, perhaps you could clarify. did you mean to say that you know the ryu-zin was created before the pangolin? there are photos of the pangolin dating back to 1997. and i understand that the actual shape of the scales are different, but are the scales of the ryu-zin not, at heart, a tessellation, much like the plates of the pangolin are?
however, i think it's very unfair to other artists to automatically think that something they created is kamiya-inspired, as it does indeed suggest that kamiya and his works are the center of origami. are we really gonna ask every artist who designs a super complex eastern dragon now if it was derived from the ryu-zin? i don't think that's intentional by any means, but it's also ridiculous.
this actual gallery is only 3 pages long. a minimum--a BARE minimum--of lurking demonstrates that leo lai uses modulars, and does not strictly adhere to using a square (the cp for his cello is on page 2...). so even though i am not a designer, i can intuit that his dragon may therefore also be modular, and may not be derived from a square--which very quickly differentiates it from the ryu-zin. and even before legionzilla made his post, i was going to say that, aesthetically, this dragon is much closer in appearance to kade chen's than to the ryu-zin. and even if you weren't aware that kade chen had an eastern dragon, the head of this eastern dragon is much closer in design to the head of his own ki-rin than it is to the ryu-zin.
i know this seems like cranky admonishment for new posters, but i would rather think of it as encouragement to go outside the world of kamiya. there is a ton of talent out there, lai inclusive. that should be self-evident by his own designs. me personally, i would prefer diagrams to his cellist over kamiya's ryu-zin (the cello is my favorite stringed instrument). i encourage new posters to go to nicolas terry's twitter, and visit the flickr account of all the myriad of talented designers.
also, perhaps you could clarify. did you mean to say that you know the ryu-zin was created before the pangolin? there are photos of the pangolin dating back to 1997. and i understand that the actual shape of the scales are different, but are the scales of the ryu-zin not, at heart, a tessellation, much like the plates of the pangolin are?
I guess many tessellators would be very aggrieved by the statement that one tessellation is just like another...
I don't know the exact dates when the Pangolin or the RjuZin where designed first, the dates I mentioned above where just those I found when visiting Joisel's and Kamiya's homepage, neither of these two models seemed to be the first version, so it's hard to say which one was first and it doesn't really matter since those two models are completely different, with Joisel's being mainly a tessellation shaped into a pangolin and Kamiya's being a long snake like dragon with some tessellated parts to give more detail.
I agree that the dragon in this gallery has very little in common with the Rju Zin by Satoshi Kamiya. Just like Bethnor, I guess that it is derived from multiple sheets. The overall appearance is just that of an Asian style dragon, it if was influenced by Kamiya in any way only Leo Lai knows.
PS: My name is Anna not Anne.
I don't know the exact dates when the Pangolin or the RjuZin where designed first, the dates I mentioned above where just those I found when visiting Joisel's and Kamiya's homepage, neither of these two models seemed to be the first version, so it's hard to say which one was first and it doesn't really matter since those two models are completely different, with Joisel's being mainly a tessellation shaped into a pangolin and Kamiya's being a long snake like dragon with some tessellated parts to give more detail.
I agree that the dragon in this gallery has very little in common with the Rju Zin by Satoshi Kamiya. Just like Bethnor, I guess that it is derived from multiple sheets. The overall appearance is just that of an Asian style dragon, it if was influenced by Kamiya in any way only Leo Lai knows.
PS: My name is Anna not Anne.
apologies, anna.
at any rate, joseph wu's old page has a photo of the pangolin dating it to 1997. if one googles it a flickr photo from 1997 also appears.
my point in referring to the pangolin, is that there was a time when this was considered the "origami holy grail" (and, in truth, those were the exact words used to describe it, not chosen by me, btw).
as time passed, there are many who believe the ryu-zin supplanted it.
with time, myself, i've come to believe that such distinctions are extremely artificial--at best.
secondly, i do feel that, even though the models are very different, they are the natural evolution of the idea of using tessellations to add scales to a given subject, different as the scales may be.
also, not having folded tessellations myself, is the process not basically folding pleats, unlocking layers, and sinks as necessary to shape? am i incorrect in saying that yosshino was the first to do this in representational origami with his boar? take note i am not commenting on the artistic merits of such a process, or that the final product might not be very different. for instance, though the designs in origami insects 2 have been described (accurately, i feel) as, for the most part, finding bizarre references, collapsing into a base, and sinking in and out to thin, this doesn't mean that the models themselves have no artistic value or aren't as different from each other as night and day.
at any rate, joseph wu's old page has a photo of the pangolin dating it to 1997. if one googles it a flickr photo from 1997 also appears.
my point in referring to the pangolin, is that there was a time when this was considered the "origami holy grail" (and, in truth, those were the exact words used to describe it, not chosen by me, btw).
as time passed, there are many who believe the ryu-zin supplanted it.
with time, myself, i've come to believe that such distinctions are extremely artificial--at best.
secondly, i do feel that, even though the models are very different, they are the natural evolution of the idea of using tessellations to add scales to a given subject, different as the scales may be.
also, not having folded tessellations myself, is the process not basically folding pleats, unlocking layers, and sinks as necessary to shape? am i incorrect in saying that yosshino was the first to do this in representational origami with his boar? take note i am not commenting on the artistic merits of such a process, or that the final product might not be very different. for instance, though the designs in origami insects 2 have been described (accurately, i feel) as, for the most part, finding bizarre references, collapsing into a base, and sinking in and out to thin, this doesn't mean that the models themselves have no artistic value or aren't as different from each other as night and day.
Tessellations in origami started in the 80s, but I think that you're right Bethnor that Yoshino's Boar is the first model to incorporate them in an animal model. It was a very innovative design.
Except every model from the fish base.It's the only model I know that uses the two opposite sides of a square to create the illusion of length.
