Barrel, Orbiter, Rover variants of other than Harvest Moon..
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic Reply to topic
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
   
Author Message

Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3615
Submissions: 149
Location: Germany, Herxheim

Barrel, Orbiter, Rover variants of other than Harvest Moon..
Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:46 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

You surely know some weaves submitted by torridhawk and me. These are Moon Rhino (Moon Barrel), Moon Orbiter, and Moon Rover. Now I applied this technique to other weaves, and will show the results here. I do this here also as a 'grinding stone' for our weave submission guidelines, what is WEAVE, what is Weave VARIANT, and what is Weave MODIFICATION. And I expect some discussion, before I decide whether and where to submit (some of these) weaves, or not...

Let's begin with Byzantine as basis weave to be modified.



These are, what I call 'Byzantine Barrel' (straight and twisted shown), Byzantine Orbiter', and 'Byzantine Rover'.

Then I began to apply the same technique to a simple 2-2-2 chain, to make the real 'parent' weaves of this modification group. I omitted the Barrel weave here, as it is well-known, but 'normal' barrel is based on a 2-1-2-1 chain; here I do double-connector variants of the weaves, that are called 'Orbiter' and 'Rover' by me, to continue a consistent nomenclature.



Playing around a bit, I made some other examples, this time not omitting every second ring pair, resulting in 'Double Rover' and 'Double Barrel'. And last, but not least I used a Half Byzantine+1(paired) as basis, and set one Rover ring - following the nomenclature that would be 'Half Byzantine Rover' - Double Orbiter, Half Byzantine Orbiter, Half Byzantine Barrel, or some twisted ones are further, straightforward variants, but not (yet) woven.




All examples shown were made from rings in the AR 4.8 to 5.8 range (1.2mm BA wound on 5.5, 6.0, 6.5mm mandrels, sawcut) - the tightest possible ones are a real PITA to set the 'pseudo orbiting' rings, but the results are best - not only ring position, but also orientation maintained well - if you stay near the low limit.

Let's discuss...

-ZiLi-


Maille Code V2.0 T7.1 R5.6 Ep Fper MAl Ws$ Cpbsw$ G0.3-6.4 I1.0-30.0 N28.25 Ps Dacdejst Xagtw S08 Hip

Human societies are like chain mail.
A single link will be worth nothing.
A chain is of use, but will break at the weakest link.
A weak weave will have the need to replace weak links.
A strong weave will survive even with weak links included.
-'me

Joined: August 10, 2005
Posts: 7098
Submissions: 337
Location: UK

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:16 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Nice work ZiLi, I think all of these deserve to be recorded.
The one but last one looks like Crow Chain though, is it the same or are there differences?
Crow Chain
and it's relative:
Corvus Chain


Maille Code
V2.0 T7.3 R5.4 Ep Feur MAg/Cu Wm$ Cbjpw$ G0.5/3.0 I1.5/12.0 N322.150 Pajs Dacdjsw Xa7g631p4t24w64 S88 Hipsu

Joined: August 14, 2006
Posts: 1890
Submissions: 50
Location: McPherson, Kansas

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:22 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Not bad. Some of those are definitely new weaves in my book. One that jumps out at me as not a new weave is what I think you are calling Double Barrel (middle one in the last group). This is more accurately either Doubled Jellybeans or maybe Jellybean Barrels or something along those lines. It relates to Jellybeans on Parade in the same way that Barrel relates to Rhinos Snorting Drano.

Or, as Legba pointed out, Crow Chain. Smile

When I have a bit more time, I may take a closer look at the others, as well.

Edit: Oh, and check the Double Rover (first one in the last group) for similarities to 4 Winds.


Comprehensive Diameter Database: Web Page | Online Spreadsheet | About the database

"When you have bigger wire, you make bigger maille. It's neat like that." -Cynake, January 15, 2009

Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3615
Submissions: 149
Location: Germany, Herxheim

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:56 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Yea Sara, you're right - Crow/Corvus Chain belong to this group of variants (or vice versa Very Happy). Crow Chain is identical to the 'Double Barrel', while Corvus Chain would be (in my nomenclature) 'Alternate Double Rhino/Barrel' - the already published names are easier to memorize, while mine might provide a hint about the weave's structure. See that I am currently just too obsessed with experimental weaving, and did not look up the Weave database for existing, already published ones - I already suspected or even expected that some of my shown variants already reside in the database, as they are just too 'easy' to be missed.

My main intention here is to show that there is a group of variations that can be applied to a number of base weaves, resulting in a multitude of weave variants. My second intention was to provide a grinding stone for our weave submission and grading guidelines - especially the border between variant and modification. And if necessary, there is a group of Elfweave variants using a comparable while not identical technique (some chatters know about), that could be provided as additional 'test fodder'. Smile

BTW: Did I already mention, that there a couple of further base weaves that could be rhino-barrel-orbiter-rover'ed? Laughing And that leads to the question, whether there could be a possibility to embed variation/modification techniques into our weave database, instead of creating a multitude of 'new' weaves that are just a programmatic working through a set of base weaves and these techniques... Rolling Eyes Surprised

Edit @ED: No, 4winds and Double Rover are completely different - even if 4wind's connector ring and one edge ring were omitted (or the connector ring doubled and rovered, it would be dissimilar (I guess I do not need to tell you that I already experimented with chainge_maker's weave family...)

-ZiLi-


Maille Code V2.0 T7.1 R5.6 Ep Fper MAl Ws$ Cpbsw$ G0.3-6.4 I1.0-30.0 N28.25 Ps Dacdejst Xagtw S08 Hip

Human societies are like chain mail.
A single link will be worth nothing.
A chain is of use, but will break at the weakest link.
A weak weave will have the need to replace weak links.
A strong weave will survive even with weak links included.
-'me

Joined: July 23, 2006
Posts: 2278
Submissions: 97
Location: Standish, Michigan, USA

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Mar 31, 2010 6:13 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

To me they are all valid weave variants and I'd love to see them in the library Smile. Great work, ZiLi!

ZiLi wrote:
And that leads to the question, whether there could be a possibility to embed variation/modification techniques into our weave database, instead of creating a multitude of 'new' weaves that are just a programmatic working through a set of base weaves and these techniques...Rolling Eyes Surprised


Working on that Smile! In the (possible) weave reorganization list I've been working on each of the main weave categories has been broken down into smaller subcategories for doing just that (not too dissimilar to what Chao posted earlier in another thread).


Insistence is futile.

We are the Quartz, lower your shovels and surrender your rocks. We will add your gemological and mineralogical distinctiveness to our own. You will adapt to service us. Resistance is rutile.

Handmaden Designs LLC
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Handmade Artists Shop
Author Website

Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 1000
Submissions: 244

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Mar 31, 2010 7:43 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

They are all distinct weaves, both variants and modifications should be submitted to the weave library. Right now we're just trying to figure out how to organize them. The difference between them is pretty subjective and only relates to the perceived Form vs. Function of the distinct element.


www.mailletec.com

Y'know, that might just be crazy enough to work!

Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3615
Submissions: 149
Location: Germany, Herxheim

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:12 pm || Last edited by ZiLi on Wed Mar 31, 2010 9:44 pm; edited 1 time in total
Link to Post: Link to Post

Lorenzo: I tend to disagree a little bit. The VARIANTS are clearly distinct weaves, as every real variant changes the behaviour, or is structurally different to any forerunner.

But if you take Rhino vs. Barrel modification into account, you see the difference - I did not post images of the Rhino variants, as they are structurally identical to the Barrel ones, while looking slightly different. So especially Rhino/Barrel or other 'kinged' variants should shine up as dual submission as already executed, and happened e.g. on torridhawk's Moon Rhino/Barrel submission (yes it is his weave; I just 'gifted' the sibling and the submission image). Alternatively only one of both (prettier or more stable one) should shine up, and a text hint could be given that the other one is possible as well.

But that is only one opinion - mine. I just see the problem that one could have the idea (given adjusted ARs, and maybe fitted orbit ring sizes) to publish a triple or quad barrel, or kinged or queened orbiter or rover modification, X-princed, or combo rhino/orbiter mods, or some more I know and haven't published yet - for every weave that allows the rhino/orbiter/rover modification, just to push the personal weave-count. And I don't see it advisable to allow such things happen.

Edit: To clarify my point:

This one originally wasn't selected for publication while being valid by current rules as well - I call it 'Fox'; here I set two 'Rover' rings crossed, moebius-like 'under-over'.

And now to show the problematics, I just added two Rhino rings resp. Barrel pairs (a bit tight for that) at the right end of the sample. But that CANNOT be worth for three submissions (if every modification gets its own sample chain), as well as the multitude of combinations can't, imho. You see?

-ZiLi-


Maille Code V2.0 T7.1 R5.6 Ep Fper MAl Ws$ Cpbsw$ G0.3-6.4 I1.0-30.0 N28.25 Ps Dacdejst Xagtw S08 Hip

Human societies are like chain mail.
A single link will be worth nothing.
A chain is of use, but will break at the weakest link.
A weak weave will have the need to replace weak links.
A strong weave will survive even with weak links included.
-'me

Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 4378
Submissions: 79
Location: tres piedras, new mexico

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Mar 31, 2010 9:43 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

ZiLi wrote:
Lorenzo: I tend to disagree a little bit. The VARIANTS are clearly distinct weaves, as every real variant changes the behaviour, or is structurally different to any forerunner.
-ZiLi-


to me, the difference is ring interaction. if there is a new ring interaction, then it our job (as weave theorists) to distill that interaction into the simplest form.. what you did with the 2-2 simple chain is a good example of that. that distillation, to me, becomes the weave that is modified, or that other weaves become a variant of.

modifications, as i understand them, are submissions with identical ring interactions, but have kinged or scaled effects put on them.

variants are, to me, combinations of distilled interactions.

kim


PSA: remember to stretch.
3.o is fixing everything.

Joined: August 14, 2006
Posts: 1890
Submissions: 50
Location: McPherson, Kansas

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:43 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

ZiLi wrote:
My main intention here is to show that there is a group of variations that can be applied to a number of base weaves, resulting in a multitude of weave variants.

...

BTW: Did I already mention, that there a couple of further base weaves that could be rhino-barrel-orbiter-rover'ed? Laughing And that leads to the question, whether there could be a possibility to embed variation/modification techniques into our weave database, instead of creating a multitude of 'new' weaves that are just a programmatic working through a set of base weaves and these techniques... Rolling Eyes


I'd almost like to see a modifications database with things like kinging, mobiusing, shaggying, etc., separate from the main weaves data. However, specific gallery examples of particular weaves modified could still be run through the main weave's gallery image section.

ZiLi wrote:
Edit @ED: No, 4winds and Double Rover are completely different - even if 4wind's connector ring and one edge ring were omitted (or the connector ring doubled and rovered, it would be dissimilar (I guess I do not need to tell you that I already experimented with chainge_maker's weave family...)


Okay, now that I have a bit of time to actually look at pictures and not just work from memory, not completely different, but different in the same way that Jellybeans differs from Rhinos.


Comprehensive Diameter Database: Web Page | Online Spreadsheet | About the database

"When you have bigger wire, you make bigger maille. It's neat like that." -Cynake, January 15, 2009

Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3615
Submissions: 149
Location: Germany, Herxheim

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:44 pm || Last edited by ZiLi on Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:53 pm; edited 1 time in total
Link to Post: Link to Post

OK Kim, let's sum up.

There are the basic Rhino, (Barrel), Orbiter, Rover, and now Fox modification techniques - note the bracket around Barrel as that is already one with dubious validity for me. And then there are the basic paired-ring weaves like 2-2-2 (that is already a variant of 1-1-1!), Byzantine, or Harvest Moon (just to name the ones that were shown combined, currently - but there are more of them (like e.g. GSG that looks promising)...

The modification techniques find their valid database place in application to the simplest base weave they can be applied to - 1-2-1 in case of Rhino (or Barrel), and 2-2-2 in case of Orbiter, Rover and Fox - Rover works for 1-2-1 as well and doesn't look bad, but does not really lock the rings in a stable orientation.

But what shall we do with further combinations? The possible high amount of Combos may end up in more database cluttering as anyone of us likes. There must be drawn a line, imho, beyond that an embedding in the Weave database should be avoided - except these are allowed only temporary as 'standalone' weaves, until MAIL3's structure allows to classify AND display them as 'secondaries' of their repective ancestors.

-ZiLi-


Maille Code V2.0 T7.1 R5.6 Ep Fper MAl Ws$ Cpbsw$ G0.3-6.4 I1.0-30.0 N28.25 Ps Dacdejst Xagtw S08 Hip

Human societies are like chain mail.
A single link will be worth nothing.
A chain is of use, but will break at the weakest link.
A weak weave will have the need to replace weak links.
A strong weave will survive even with weak links included.
-'me

Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 1000
Submissions: 244

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:53 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

What Kim said.

Fox is definitely a variant.

Alternating fox with rhino makes another new variant.

A chain with both combined in no particular pattern or with a pattern of consecutive repetitions of one is not a new variant, just a combination of weaves. At best it could be argued as a modification of the original fox/rhino variant.

An example of a modification on fox might be to alternate the chirality of the crossover rings.


www.mailletec.com

Y'know, that might just be crazy enough to work!

Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3615
Submissions: 149
Location: Germany, Herxheim

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Apr 01, 2010 8:56 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

ok, here a new photo for 'Fox' - as everybody tries to convince me to submit them all into the database I will do so - not all, but the basic and maybe some 'fancy' ones that behave well in reality and are not only academic ones.


And btw: I mentioned GSG as possible basis for variation? This one didn't work out as expected, but yielded a fine result nevertheless, and seems to work also in wider strips and sheets - it's a simple orbital fitted at the 'right' spot (see right end of image where this can be seen in the there unmodified GSG), and I have some slight doubts that this really can be a formerly undiscovered/unpublished one...

(click image to get larger one)

Gals'n'guys: I NEED the comments before submission, as mine go through automatically and I don't want to submit invalid or duplicate items. And I forgot to mention: AR 5.2 used for both of them...

-ZiLi-


Maille Code V2.0 T7.1 R5.6 Ep Fper MAl Ws$ Cpbsw$ G0.3-6.4 I1.0-30.0 N28.25 Ps Dacdejst Xagtw S08 Hip

Human societies are like chain mail.
A single link will be worth nothing.
A chain is of use, but will break at the weakest link.
A weak weave will have the need to replace weak links.
A strong weave will survive even with weak links included.
-'me

Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 4378
Submissions: 79
Location: tres piedras, new mexico

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:02 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

ElementalDragon wrote:

I'd almost like to see a modifications database with things like kinging, mobiusing, shaggying, etc., separate from the main weaves data. However, specific gallery examples of particular weaves modified could still be run through the main weave's gallery image section.


the idea to have modifications show up only within the pages of the weave(s) they modify or within AR searches that have an "include modifications" box checked has been brought up.

in theory we could have a checkbox to remove the variants, too.. this would allow people to view only the most distilled iteration of an interaction.

kim


PSA: remember to stretch.
3.o is fixing everything.

Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 1000
Submissions: 244

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Apr 01, 2010 5:55 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Zili, maybe hold off on submitting these for a few days until DL gets the weave organization changes for modifications and variants done. We can use them as tests of the new system, if you don't mind.

Other than that, feel free to submit them, just let me know so that I can read through them afterwards and I'll let you know if any changes need to be made.


www.mailletec.com

Y'know, that might just be crazy enough to work!

Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3615
Submissions: 149
Location: Germany, Herxheim

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:46 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

lorenzo wrote:
Zili, maybe hold off on submitting these for a few days until DL gets the weave organization changes for modifications and variants done. We can use them as tests of the new system, if you don't mind.


No problem at all - I want to fill the gaps in the 'dirty dozen' (that has already more than a dozen members), anyway. And I have to prepare the submission texts, with notes about features and behavior of the particular weaves, as I do not only want to show an image and give AR info (as usual), but want to give at least hints, how these can be rebuilt, so these are rebuilt, eventually (no, the bottom one does not belong to the group, but...) Very Happy


(Click image to enlarge)

-ZiLi-


Maille Code V2.0 T7.1 R5.6 Ep Fper MAl Ws$ Cpbsw$ G0.3-6.4 I1.0-30.0 N28.25 Ps Dacdejst Xagtw S08 Hip

Human societies are like chain mail.
A single link will be worth nothing.
A chain is of use, but will break at the weakest link.
A weak weave will have the need to replace weak links.
A strong weave will survive even with weak links included.
-'me

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Page 1 of 2. Goto page 1, 2  Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Mon Feb 24, 2020 6:16 pm
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
Display posts from previous: