Doubles Isolated Antispin

 Written by: mcp

If I want to be down with the bendy diamond pattern, I'll learn box anti-spin while REALLY concentrating on isolating the corners. y'know?

bah humbug

Just do it really really really fast, then
A) people won't notice your isolation is poo
B) you won't need an 8 second photo exposure, cos people can see the patterns with their eyes.

 Written by: mcp


here's a picture I made earlier, it's for imakode, about anti-spin with quarter time isolations.

http://www.homeofpoi.com/gallery/showpho...=500&page=1

[ ]

Nobody likes it when i do that one with doubles doing mirrored versions of the pattern.

They think it looks ugly. Maybe i'm just wearing the wrong trousers when i do it. Or possibly i need a new hat. Or maybe if i stopped in the middle for a little bit of contemporary dance...


it is rather an odd beast though.

and ARGH! you can make wick axis isos with proper arm circles. WIERD!!!

the timing of rotation of staff along different points of the curve is different. The 8 compass points all match up (either horiz, vert or diagonal)
But the how rotation speed is emphasised along the eighths seems to be different.

That is odd and requires some thinking. or some playing. hmm, playing i reckon. it's much easier.

 Written by: megthementalist

cole: it's not difficult. You spin a figure of eight in your right hand and then take a step to the right and you're still spinning the same figure of eight. like OO it doesn't have to change direction and cross your body, you just have to move.

It's the same with the anti-spin version, except you have to do the think I describe somewhere above to get it to work.

 Written by: madmeg

simian: people would only see the pattern if you could do it that well that fast.

wicks moving in straight lines is messed up.

wicks moving in straight lines across a big ++ pattern around your body is pure firespinning crazyness in a bottle.

and i say this antispin cross stuff looks waaaaaay better in motion than it ever will in a photo.

so nerr


cole. x

 Written by: coleman

and i say this antispin cross stuff looks waaaaaay better in motion than it ever will in a photo.

awww i luv you cole

 Written by: coleman


meg - what you describe is certainly not the same thing as tracing an infinity pattern:

 Written by: megthementalist

cole: it's not difficult. You spin a figure of eight in your right hand and then take a step to the right and you're still spinning the same figure of eight. like OO it doesn't have to change direction and cross your body, you just have to move.

It's the same with the anti-spin version, except you have to do the think I describe somewhere above to get it to work.

nah - spinning a figure 8 then stepping to the right doesn't make an infinity pattern - think for like two seconds about the paths the wicks follow as you move right and you'll see that none of what you're saying makes any sense.

no none of what you're saying makes any sense.

I was talking about the anti-spin version when I talked about the infinity sign. Then you went and applied it to the figure of eight version, which I was using as a prop to explain to you what I was doing.

Simain: What *are* you talking ABOUT?

 Written by: simian


i've been spinning a biro in front of my monitor

glad i'm not the only one...

there is indeed some weirdness going on with these patterns but that is why we love them so...

i'm not a trigonometrist but try this:

go inbetween the two possible hand patterns to see the relationship more clearly, i.e. try and trace the cross antispin pattern using a straight-sided diamond hand pattern...


cole. x

 Written by: coleman


meg - did you bother to think about what pattern you get by spinning a circle and stepping to the side.

 Written by: you

You spin a figure of eight in your right hand and then take a step to the right and you're still spinning the same figure of eight. like OO it doesn't have to change direction and cross your body, you just have to move.

It's the same with the anti-spin version, except you have to do the think I describe somewhere above to get it to work.

 Written by: you

making a cross anti-spin travel over two crosses that don't cross your body (forwards and forwards, instead of forwards and reverse) is possible too, just with having to make an infinity sign around the points instead of doing them in the order that the monkey states. Might look alright if it was hella tight.

 Written by: me

tracing an infinity sign with your hand would mean mean that you travel round one half of the pattern clockwise and the other anticlockwise.

unless you reverse the direction of spin of the stick as you go from one side of the infinity pattern to the other, one half will be spin and the other antispin, no?

 Written by: me


translation of the double plus pattern to 'normal' (read 'hands move in circles only' or 'messy') antispin, would equate to [a hand pattern that is] something like two circles next to each other:

oo

to link them and maintain the antispin motion, you have to go over the top of the first circle, down to the join *staying on the top* over the top of the second circle then round and then across the bottoms.

"I start from the bottom left, up to the left vertical, then down to horizontal then up again? Or down to the the right bottom, which is probably what my anti-spin wants, rather than getting tricky with those two verticals in a row."

this seems to suggest that you think you link these two antispin circles/patterns by moving your hand in an infinity sign type motion.

cole. x

 Written by: cole

i can't do ++ as a fwd to rev antispin fig 8 yet but, i did work out that spinning ++ using longarm circles only is impossible without either a direction change of the arm or the stick on the horizontal join.