According to the Charites Origami vellum can't be 'embellished'.

In addition, origami may not be embellished in any way whatsoever, beyond the colour of vellum used to fold the design

I would like to qustion this, given that vellum can indeed be embellished. Vellum manuscripts, scrolls and maps can be written and drawn on in multicoloured inks, they can even have gold and silver leaf. They can be marbled (yes, leather can be marbled as well as paper). Why can't squares of vellum have the same treatment? Or if it's the vellum that's the perceived issue, why not switch to pure paper? We do have the woodcrafting skill that allows us to make sketch paper that could be added as a comm if its not already.

Is it a targeting fear? Is our magic not.. powerful enough? Can the printing presses only handle one colour? But if so, do bookbinders hands lack the skill to hand embellish?

The charm and appeal of origami is not just the shapes, but the beautiful patterns as well. Any google search on origami paper will reveal tons of patterned, foiled, and textured papers.

So, what's the problem?

Folded paper would probably not hold onto things like gold leaf too well. I think they're finding ones that have silly things like jewels stuck on, and finding issue with that.

Behold, gold leaf origami paper and origami :) Though there's also gold leaf embossed paper, and gold foil paper, and gold handmade paper. And even with crystals, really who says you can't apply embellishments to the finished origami product after folding?

I agree with this! My grandfather use to make handmade paper, filled with different things like flowers and such, or the gold leaf, though only for special occasions...I would like to be able to make some origami reminiscent of that, instead of having to put in the comments each time that handmade paper can be made with stuff, meer. Gold leaf or painted dragons and such would be nice also. In short...yay Orventa?

Flowers might be a bit harder in regards to animal vellum... if only because I don't know if they can be pressed in during the vellum making process. unless the switch were made to paper instead of vellum? Or vegetable vellum. -ponder-

Yes to veggie vellum (sarcasm?), if just to get rid of vegetable comms.

No sarcasm, modern vellum is plant-matter-vegetable based.

I was hesitantly applying sarcasm to my own statement there.

I appreciate that today it is used in different manners, however the design for origami in Lusternia is very classic - using only single coloured folded paper to create the designs. No cuts, no tears, no painting, etc etc. For that reason, the design rules exist (and have existed since we released origami).

AB BOOKBINDING WETFOLD

Traditional folds and cuts can make many shapes, but cannot produce some of the rounded forms common in nature. Wet fold origami employs the judicious use of moisture to soften the paper, allowing careful shaping to create forms evocative of animals, spirits, and the gentler forces in the world, and such shapes serve as a potent, if temporary, good luck charm with defensive and curative properties.

AB BOOKBINDING KIRIGAMI

The most complex origami shapes are those made with the most limited number of folds and techniques. Only an origami master can practice kirigami, in which cuts, tears, the use of moisture, and other simplifying tricks are eschewed in favor of only a very few permitted folds. Shapes produced by kirigami tend to appear simple but reveal considerable underlying complexity, often resembling the most fundamental objects in the worlds; and some say that kirigami is analogous to the act of creation by which Dynara folded nothingness into matter, spirit, and life, which is why kirigami is often practiced as a spiritual exploration or a form of meditation.

EDIT: Before you say that they're 'eschewed' in the Kirigami one, it also clearly implies that they are used in other methods.


And even if what you say is true as the reason things are so ridiculously restricted, is the way Lusternia has always done things necessarily the best way for things in Lusternia? My previous frustration about 'package' designs going through as absolutely anything is worth mentioning again, I think.

... I honestly don't see anything there that goes against what Eventru said. Especially not the bolded parts... What does moist paper and shaping them into animals have to do with cuts, tears and patterned paper/vellum? And before you say "Well, it says "lack of cuts, tears and moisture in the second one", that doesn't mean it's actually used in creating wetfold or modular origami, just because wetfold uses one of the three.

I must, however, disagree with Eventru on a number of points: Judging by Wikipedia, cuts and tears were actually common in classical Japanese origami and only disappeared in modern times; around 1960s-70s. Instead, origami with cuts are commonly referred to as kirigami (from Japanese "kiru" = to cut, "kami" = paper). So while modular origami, actionorigami and wetfold shouldn't be allowed to have cuts in them, kirigami are actually named for having cuts in them.

Eschew - Deliberately avoid using; abstain from: "he appealed to the crowd to eschew violence".

It's very difficult to "deliberately avoid using" something that you aren't even aware of. If it is something origami masters eschew when practicing this particular origami technique, that is because it is something they commonly use in other techniques.

2 - The emphasized portion of the wetfold AB is demonstrating not only a technique that may or not be considered "classic", but also implies the potential for designs we are currently restricted from making, under the current system.

Actually, any of the Origami AB's can be used to make the same point. Action origami's states that it's possible to create a variety of esoteric shapes. Modular origami specifically mentions a broad spectrum in "The resulting origami may appear like a dragon or mountain." Currently, you can make an origami dragon. But there's no pattern for a mountain, so try to make one, and it's rejected.

My point is this - that the capability of what people with the skill can accomplish is clearly not intended to be as simplistic as Eventru is suggesting. And that the concept of the same people who can magically imbue essence into a book to make it glow (along with any other patterns or effects they desire with the pages themselves), being somehow incapable of folding with anything more than monochromatic pieces of vellum, is frankly very absurd.

Riluna, you're conflating two wholly unrelated things. Yes, origami in both the real world and Lusternia use cuts and tears (except kirigami). Cuts and tears are something you do to the single color of paper you have. There's no connection whatsoever between that, and the question of adding some other ingredient besides that single color of paper.

It doesn't seem such an enormous leap to me. Ever tried making origami in the real world? Sure, you might have learned how with a blank white piece of paper (or twenty, before you finally pull it off and make it look neat). Once you know how, you start seeing potential origami in every piece of paper you come across. There's nothing stopping you from using newspapers, bills, homework, old sketches, etc. etc. etc. Or, for those particularly skilled, to use things that have particular patterns and colors applied to them with the intent of creating a very specific effect, or even combining multiple completely different sheets, like a green and a red one to create a rose. (i.e. those lovely pictures posted earlier in this thread)

What's stopping you from adding some ingredient to it, before applying folds to paper? Both are things you do to it. We're talking about bookbinders, people who design, color, manipulate, and generally add ingredients to paper all the time. How is it anything but ridiculous that these people would look at a piece of paper they just made, and decide they can't fold it because it has patterns of moons, or polka dots, or stripes, or anything besides a single color?

As a tangential point, as far as I've been made aware you -can- have origami designs of multiple colours so long as there are multiple vellum used. Which, as a starting point in favour of the Charites, is at least a helpful step working forward in the bounds of the imposed limitations. .

Though on topic I do agree that the limitations do seem silly, particularly in a world as arguably advanced as Lusternia . And while I respect the adherence to established lore Eventru and your defense thereof, that should only be a starting point in personal opinion. Lusternia by its very nature isn't static and would be far less than it was if we didn't -build- on the lore and conventions as opposed to saying 'this is how it is, this is how it will remain'. Oversimplifying I know, but if we're not able to improve upon our designs and push the conventions then we're going to see a lot of the same over and over, which to me defeats the purpose. Now excuse me I have to figure out where I found the soapbox ^.=.^;

Someone write a treatise on using magic to bond various (thin) things to vellum without it losing any of its structural integrity and submit it to the bardics/library contest. I'd look to how runes are imprinted on totems/statues, how gems are fused with symphonist instruments, and how hexes are placed onto skin. The act of making Lusternian origami is already fairly magical, as the shape is infused with magic to create an appropriate effect.

That said, I do aesthetically agree that origami shouldn't be... gaudy. And certain types of the origami really should only be of minimal fanciness, with one or two colors. Kirigami and wetfold come to mind.

Enyalida:

That said, I do aesthetically agree that origami shouldn't be... gaudy. And certain types of the origami really should only be of minimal fanciness, with one or two colors. Kirigami and wetfold come to mind.

I really don't understand why the color of the paper you start with should make any difference (other than the comm cost to produce, just like any other trade). Although I do agree that the general shapes of the designs should fit their theme.

As it is currently, this is not how it works. At all. Sure, fitting the theme of kirigami would have designs that appear simple, even if they're complex or difficult to produce. But right now, the only semblance of creativity we have is to take shapes that already exist, and make them fancier or simpler than models that have already been designed. So, it's perfectly ok to make a kirigami dragon that's way more ornate than what you're suggesting here. Just don't dare make it a striped dragon.

What are you talking about?

There aren't any design restrictions on color... Read the post above mine, where Maellio points out ways to incorporate multiple colors! I was expressing that there are limits to silliness. We've gone over the pattern limitation argument many (manymanylmany) times, this is talking about unnecessary embellishments like the addition of metallic or particularly fancy techniques that are counter to what the rp of that type of origami is supposed to be. For instance, kirigami is supposed to embody complexity with simple technique. Now stick sequins on it, yay?

Yes, I get it's frustrating to be restricted by the pattern nouns, I was an active bookbinder when origami came out and there were really no patterns. It's one of the things inherently 'bad' about the way the design system is set up right now. It's also not the topic of conversation.

Make your paper shimmer with gold, have spots, or be patterned with sequins, whatever. It's just the color of the paper, and has nothing whatsoever do do with the rp of the type of the origami, nor would even affect how the origami is actually folded. Two tone (because you're using two monochromatic pieces of paper) is not the same thing as having freedom of color in your designs.You currently can not, for example, make the fish above because it involves a single piece of paper with more than one color on it.

Tailoring shirts is an rp theme, designed to make clothes that cover your torso. Now stick sequins on it, yay?

Unnecessary, seemingly arbitrary restrictions on these designs are fully the topic of this conversation, and are all equally relevant in stifling the creativity of any of them. Are you just trying to argue, or do you have a point?