Dear professor Thalmann : I thank you very much for the letter of November 3, 1994, and result of review of our paper. We revised our manuscript in accordance with referee's comments. I would like to resubmit the modified manuscript. Here I enclose two sets of manuscripts. Reply to Reviewer's Comments Dear Reviewer : We greatly appreciate your careful review and useful comments to our paper. According to your advice and recommendation we revised the manuscript as follows. 1. We added representative works by international experts to reference. And we removed some Japanese researches that have few relations to our study. 2. We expanded section 2.4 for texture mapping. But we did not include antialiasing to it because we did not use any special technique of antialiasing in the system. For instance, we indicated importance of algorithm to derive consistent texture mapping. 3. Section 4.2 for the energy function is expanded. But, it only used a simple physical model. So we showed interactivity of the model in a new section we added for interactivity. 4. We removed almost all the word " virtual". We found how to use it. Thank you. Reply to Reviewer's Comments Dear Reviewer : We greatly appreciate your careful review and useful comments to our paper. According to your advice and recommendation we revised the manuscript as follows. 1. We removed unusual definition of 3D pointer "Picker". And we combined section 2.2 and 2.3. 2. We added numerical results of interactivity in several cases as section 5. We presented an example of a face being folded in half repeatedly. We chose the case of folding a crane as a practical example. Date: Thu, 3 Nov 94 18:15:03 JST To: miyazaki@sccs.chukyo-u.ac.jp From: "Nadia Magnenat Thalmann, tel.+41-22-7057769, fax+41-22-3202927" (by way of toriwaki@toriwaki.nuie.nagoya-u.ac.jp) X-Sender: toriwaki@toriwaki.nuie.nagoya-u.ac.jp Subject: Paper on origami X-Mailer: Eudora-J(1.3.2J4) Dear Professor Toriwaki: I have now received the three referee reports concerning your paper. I am pleased to accept it for publication if you are able to reviseit according to the referees' comments. One of the reviewer, Dr. Geoff Wyvill has decided to help you to improve the English language. For this reason, he needed not remain anonymous. Please contact him (his e-mail address is geoff@otago.ac.nz). When you have revised your paper, please send me two copies with original pictures and I will forward the paper to the publisher. Please confirm me that you will revise the paper. Best Regards Nadia Magnenat Thalmann ============================ Review 1: ========= Title: An Origami Playing Simulator in The Virtual Space Authors: Miyazaki et al. Summarize the main points of the paper Describes an interactive simulator for origami. What does the work contribute Useful implementation of a difficult modelling problem. Is the paper adequately written? Yes but see comments Overall rating 1(=3Dvery bad, 6 =3D excellent): 5 Recommendation: Accept with minor changes Comments There are some important omissions in the paper. There is not really enough information to repeat the work. In the data structure it is not clear how a set of faces are ordered geometrically. If I fold a piece of paper in half several times,=20 finish up with a pile of faces. How do I know which is on the outside? Section 3.1 "equidistant plane" I realised, eventually, that this means the plane consisting of all the points equidistant from the two given points. This needs to be explained. 3.3 d) Not at all clear how you recognise what is "overlapped". The conclusion needs to be expanded. Eg: Are the operations 'Bending', 'Folding up' and 'Tucking in' sufficient to describe most of classical origami? How can you build "rabbit's ear" folds from these elements? I would like to see some comment on the effectiveness of the 3D manipulator -- using the mouse button for the third dimension. There are cases where an otherwise legitimate fold would penetrate another part of the paper. I assume there is no collision detection in the system or the authors would have mentioned it. I would like to have this point discussed. There is no mention of the effect of paper thickness on folding as opposed to bending. Some classical models depend on this. It should be mentioned in the conclusions. Finally, there are a lot of minor problems with the English. I think this is a very good paper and I would like to see it presented to best advantage. Therefore, if the authors can send me the text in electronic form, I am willing to proof correct it for English language errors. For this reason, I need not remain anonymous. Please send email to geoff@otago.ac.nz ============================================ Review 2 ======== Paper number: Title: An Origami playing simulator in the virtual space Authors: Shin-Ya et al. Summarize the main points of the paper A very good application of Computer Graphics in japanese traditional Origami playing What does this work contribute to the field of Visualization and/or Animation ? The paper presents an interesting application interective playing ORIGAMI on physically-based paper model with photo realistic texture mapping Is the paper adequaly written: Yes Overall rating: 4.5 Recommendation: accept with minor changes Justify your recommendation Some improvements should be made: 1. In the conventional studies for paper folding, the authors should also mention the work by international experts, not only Japanese research. They may cite work on Sculpting and physics-based cloth models for paper (Terzopoulos, Haumann, Carignan et al etc...) 2. The texture mapping on the deformable paper is another important part of paper, but Section 2.5 is too brief and should be expanded. For example, antialiasing could be described in details. 3. In 4.2, the use of the energy function should also be mentioned more. Where does it come from ? If it is a new function, what is the advantage ? Please use more examples. 4. I am not sure that the use of the term "Virtual Reality" is appropriate for this paper. VR has specific meaning in the litterature of Computer Graphics. It does not mean that all computer models should be called Virtual models because they are not in the real world. ========================= Review 3 ======== Title: An Origami playing simulator in the virtual space Authors: Shin-Ya et al. Summarize the main points of the paper Combination of efficient data structures and data manipulation together with simple physical models to reach interactivity. What does this work contribute to the field of Visualization and/or Animation ? It gives a framework for software development dedicated to interactive manipulations and deformations of non-rigid objects such as paper It is illustrated by the application to japanese origami. Is the paper adequaly written: The paper is clearly organized and all important steps are illustrated with figures Overall rating: 4 Recommendation: accept with minor changes Justify your recommendation - In Section 2, the interaction part should be much less developed as it describes well-known interactive techniques. - As the main point of this paper is not either the data structure (binary trees are widely used data structures) nor the physical model, but their use and combination to reach interactivity, it is important to judge the results. Results in interactivity should be more complete and elaborated . Another section could be added giving numerical results for various data and manipulation.