| Author |
Message |
|
Joined: July 23, 2006
Posts: 2134
Submissions: 95
Location: Standish, Michigan, USA
|
|
|
| Posted on Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:32 pm |
Link to Post:  |
|
| Rognvald wrote: |
Also, is the use of the phrases 0-dimensional, 1-dimensional, 2-dimensional accurate here? Not to be overly precise... but these all have 3 dimensions, although the point is made... |
The dimensional aspect of those descriptions is in regards to the dimensional expansion of those forms. A unit weave does not expand, thus it is a 0-dimensional weave; chains and bands only expand in the length of the weaves, thus they are 1-dimensional weave forms; sheet, web, and radial expand in length and width and so are 2-dimensional weave forms, and, of course, 3D weaves expand in all directions (length, width, and depth/height).
| Rognvald wrote: | | For a weave to be tagged 'band', would that necessarily mean that it could NOT be made as a 'chain'; in other words, would a 'band' be the smallest unit of that weave? The example pictured above makes me ask. |
As ZiLi has said, 'band' is not an easy thing to completely answer. To some, 'bands' are simply wide chains, while to others, they are narrow strips of sheets. To me, they are a quasi-form that exists between sheet and chain. To wide to be seen as a chain, to narrow to be a sheet. Some, may be able to be made wider into sheets, but never thinner into chains.
|
|
|
Rognvald
 [ Big Voice ]
Joined: January 29, 2011
Posts: 238
Submissions: 0
|
|
|
| Posted on Tue Feb 07, 2012 2:55 am |
Link to Post: |
|
Good explanation of the usage of 'dimension', thank you. 'Dimensional expansion', got it!
And thanks also ZiLi and Narrina for the 'band' definition. I like the last part especially, that a 'band' can never be made thinner into a chain--- that answers that question. |
|
|
Joined: August 14, 2006
Posts: 1798
Submissions: 40
Location: McPherson, Kansas
|
|
|
| Posted on Tue Mar 20, 2012 11:20 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
The familial definitions seem a bit too general. I like the expansion terms, though.
I think limiting orbital and captive to being defined as non-structural is not accurate. I'm also not convinced that Rhino and Helm necessarily needed to be specially defined. Unless those are maybe structural definitions? Definitions of particular structures within a weave?
Alpha is a good idea. I would have used a different term than modification for a structural change, but I only came to that conclusion recently. Other than that, those two situations being defined is good thing, although, again, I think they are a bit general. Now define structural 
I'm not sure I see the difference between berus and mage the than one is a weave and one is in a weave.
Things like kinged and progression ought to start out with something like "A variant/modification in which...".
|
|
|
Donatti
 [ Ringlet ]
Joined: April 13, 2012
Posts: 13
Submissions: 0
Location: Brazil
|
|
|
| Posted on Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:52 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
I wonder, besides european 4 in 1 and other weves like 2 in 1, wich other weave is easy for a beginner to learn?
I mean, i'll start by the simple, but, on the following... wich weave shall i do?
After i get used with the 4 in 1 european, can i jump to a japanese weave for example?
thanks!
Get it Hot, hit it hard, thats how it has to be.
Be always ready, cause winter is coming, and with it, some things that were forgotten can come to live again! |
|
|
Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3494
Submissions: 147
Location: Germany, Herxheim
|
|
|
| Posted on Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:14 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
| Donatti wrote: | | After i get used with the 4 in 1 european, can i jump to a japanese weave for example? |
Why not? Feel absolutely free to try what you think is manageable with given ring collection. There are no limits. For building a solid basis portfolio I'd propose to work through the 'Alpha' tagged weaves.
-ZiLi-
Maille Code V2.0 T6.5 R5.6 Ep Fper Mfe.s Ws$ Cpbsw$ G0.4-3.5 I1.6-16.0 N28.25 Pj Dacdejst Xagtw S08 Hi
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 |
|
|
Donatti
[ Ringlet ]
Joined: April 13, 2012
Posts: 13
Submissions: 0
Location: Brazil
|
|
|
| Posted on Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:17 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
thanks zili, i believe i'm gonna try to follow the more easy ones first, slow and ever!
Get it Hot, hit it hard, thats how it has to be.
Be always ready, cause winter is coming, and with it, some things that were forgotten can come to live again! |
|
|
razocaine_07
 [ Ringlet ]
Joined: February 6, 2013
Posts: 8
Submissions: 0
Location: United Kingdom
|
|
|
| Posted on Wed Feb 06, 2013 7:37 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
| thanks so much for this, been looking for the definitions for ages |
|
|
Joined: December 22, 2007
Posts: 3609
Submissions: 99
Location: Hampton, Virginia USA
|
|
|
| Posted on Wed Feb 06, 2013 9:17 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
| razocaine_07 wrote: | | thanks so much for this, been looking for the definitions for ages |
Zili is right, try anything that catches your eye. But just for information's sake, there is also a "beginner" tag for weaves. That's also a good place to start.
|
|
|
