Submitted by Sara on 2 July 2011 - 2:03pm
Designer:
Joisel, Eric
Folder:
Adams, Sara
Difficulty Level:
High intermediate
Model type:
Animals
Mammals
Paper ratio:
Square
Paper: 30cm square of tissue foil
Model: 12cm length, 6.5cm width, 5cm height
Comments
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on 2 July 2011 - 2:38pm Permalink
are the spikes woterbombs
are the spikes woterbombs
Submitted by Sara on 2 July 2011 - 5:27pm Permalink
Basically, yes
You've got many rows of waterbombs, but every second row is offset.
-- Sara
Submitted by David (not verified) on 3 July 2011 - 2:21am Permalink
2nd row waterbombs
hi, im having trouble with the 2nd row of water bomb bases. can you offer any insight?
thanks
Submitted by kkim (not verified) on 4 July 2011 - 6:07pm Permalink
Waterbombs
Hi Sara, I did the first/top row of waterbombs but I'm having trouble with the second. Any advice?
Thanks
Submitted by antaraner (not verified) on 13 July 2011 - 5:58pm Permalink
2nd row waterbombs
To fold the second row of waterbombs you should bend the crimp you made in step 4 perpendicular downwards to the rest of the sheet. Next you can push the valleys upwards to create then the second row of waterbombs as shown on page 10 of the pdf file. While doing this change valley folds to mountain folds and the mountain folds to valley folds.
Submitted by Castword (not verified) on 19 July 2011 - 1:17am Permalink
Difficulty
Uuuhm, what's the difficulty level for this model? Complex?
Submitted by Sara on 28 July 2011 - 6:21am Permalink
high intermediate
I'd call it high intermediate. The individual steps aren't so hard, and you can use a variety of papers. These are two attributes that distinguishes the model from complex ones.
-- Sara
Submitted by Castword (not verified) on 30 July 2011 - 6:45am Permalink
Alright
Thanks for the reply !
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on 11 September 2014 - 8:43am Permalink
But Joisel called it complex...
Except that... Joisel himself called it "complex" on his website, and that yours's head looks more like a squirrel one than a hedgehog one... Moreover, Joisel said that only a certain type of paper could be used to fold it.
"This model is in “real 3D”, so itʼs considered as 'complex' during origami conventions...
3 hours minimum and a strong paper is required to fold it. "
By misleading people and calling it "non-complex", you're insulting both people who trusted you and failed in the attempt, because they thought it was easier, and Joisel's memory, by calling his work "non-complex".
http://www.theguardi...
FYI, it took him 6 years to create this model:
http://www.nytimes.c...
Submitted by Sara on 11 September 2014 - 1:23pm Permalink
No offence meant
The ranking of difficulty level of a model doesn't rate its beauty or intricacy, but just how hard it is to fold in. That's somewhat subjective, so different people will place it differently. It's a very common problem, but it's not an insult to the designer, nor to people attempting to fold it.
It also says nothing about how long it took to design the model. Indeed, some models whose difficulty level I'd rank lower (even simple) may have taken even longer to come up with. In some ways, coming up with something simple can be harder than something very complex - because you have to find the essence and that great way of achieving it in folds.
As to getting the same finish as Eric Joisel - that's also not something I'd capture in difficulty level per se. Of course, Eric Joisel was a great master and artist and I wouldn't ever claim to come even near the intricacy of finishing and shaping models as he did. But I wouldn't do that for any of his models - irrespective of their difficulty level. He just was a league of his own.
Hope that clarifies it a bit,
-- Sara
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on 11 September 2014 - 10:39pm Permalink
I wasn't speaking about
I wasn't speaking about beauty, but about difficulty to fold, regarding the many needles that are required, and to model, for the head shape.
And I wasn't saying that you should have "copied" Joisel, but that yours' head didn't look like an actual hedgehog one, but rather like a squirrel. This is how a hedgehog looks like.
https://www.google.c...
You see, the head is quite different from what you modelled.
If it was that easy (non-complex), you should have modelled it like that, and not like this:
https://www.google.c...
The complexity relies on being able to model something that can resemble as closely as possible to the original one. The more difficult it is, the more complex the model is. You generally have very good folding skills, but you were not able to model something looking like the original. Therefore, you can't claim that it's "not complex"...
Submitted by Someone (not verified) on 1 August 2011 - 12:07am Permalink
Thank you.
Thank you Sara. I've been looking diagrams for this model for a very long time. Thank you. Btw. can you make the Ankylosaurus by Ronald Koh? The diagrams are at dev.origami.com.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on 24 November 2011 - 6:11pm Permalink
Second row
would you be able to show how to do the second row of waterbombs please? I'm finding the pdf hard to follow...Thanks
Submitted by Vroix (not verified) on 6 July 2018 - 5:26pm Permalink
Paper
Can I use paper between 80-100 gsm for this model?
Submitted by Sara on 7 July 2018 - 9:26pm Permalink
Other factors
That hugely depends on the paper size, and also other qualities of the paper, e.g. how thick it is, or how crisp. I probably wouldn't recommend using printer paper, though, which would be 80gsm and probably a 21cm square.
I can also recommend the paper reviews by Ilan Garibi and Gadi Vishne for lots of information on which paper types work best for which models.
-- Sara
Add new comment