Antonio Correia said:
Asher, again I say that I may be wrong in using the word warped. Correct me if I am wrong please.
But I think I am not. These are forms generated the way warps are.
Yes, you are indeed mistaken. The curves we see here are intended and designed as such. "Warp" is applied in English only to growth of the shape outside of the planned form. That's the general usage of the word and it implies design failure. So if the body work of a car is "warped", then it needs to go to the body shop to be replaced and would be under warranty as a fault in original workmanship.
So a sculpture in the sun with copper one side and steel the other would distort because of uneven expansion and the designed form would be "warped".
Steel beams in bridges and other construction will take into account warp due to uneven heat loads. however, it's not something esthetic to admire as in an automobile showroom, seeing gleaming sensually curved surfaces, looking like they were created from a metallic womb!
Complex curvilinear forms in sheet metal are stamped, bent, stretched and subjected to all sorts of procedures, even underwater explosion over a ceramic 3D form, so that the flat sheet, through a complex series of planned stages, gets to reach the projected further changes in shape with convex and concave portions being developed according to some creative and impressive vision, with artistic aspects supporting structural integrity and functional end use. At no time would we call the designed form, "warped", as that would imply it was already damaged!
However I
can imagine an artist fixing pieces of metal between two limits, knowing full well that the sun would force the surface to distort in some seemingly random way, (it would not be random, we just don't have a description of the tethering and size of the metal sheet and the restrictions to movement).
All the surface we see are planned complex curvilinear surfaces and I simply call them curvaceous!
Asher