I posted a first attempt at this technique in Steady Hand's ultimate smiles post, then another one in the abstract section but only got one comment. So i'm taking a chance here to show the 2 portraits i did in this genre, they are after all portraits indeed. I was asked how to do a cartoon effect in the photo forum i co moderate in my area. I had seen a few but really had no idea how to achieve the effect. So i started surfing the net and my research of course led me strait to Adrian Sommeling's beautiful work. So i gave it a try and although it might seem childish or not really photographic work for some, i can assure you it is ! I have found out it is a lengthy, painstaking process, demanding both patience and observation skills. I only did a few portraits here but i can easily image the sum of work involved in a more complex image.
C&C would be greatly appreciated wether you like it or not.
Very interesting exercise, and I don't doubt that there are many aspects to doing this as well as you have here. The second image's dodging and burning about the lower face does not seem right to me, as it creates a smudginess that looks neither like dirt or natural shadow. Although I'm not really a trained observer in this area, your first portrait looks great to me as is.
I'm with both Bud and John. I absolutely love what you're doing here, but as someone who knows nothing about creating this cartoon effect, I agree with John on the dark areas on the face. They just don't look right to me. My other suggestion would be the hair. The hair looks real, but the face does look largely cartoonish. I come from old school, where in the comics the hairs had some outline but very little detail. The second kid has really good hair for creating splotches, I don't know if it makes any sense to you, but it makes perfectly good sense to me. :-)
friscoron wrote:
I'm with both Bud and John. I absolutely love what you're doing here, but as someone who knows nothing about creating this cartoon effect, I agree with John on the dark areas on the face. They just don't look right to me. My other suggestion would be the hair. The hair looks real, but the face does look largely cartoonish. I come from old school, where in the comics the hairs had some outline but very little detail. The second kid has really good hair for creating splotches, I don't know if it makes any sense to you, but it makes perfectly good sense to me. :-)
bbourizk wrote:
Ray old mate, these are bloody brilliant.
The first one is a ripper, the child has a great look for this.
You started out with two good photos as well.
Have the kids seen the final result and what did they think of them?
I had a look at Adrian's work and his work is stunning.
Now feel free to tell us how you did it
Regards
Bud
Now that's what i'm talking about ! Here when i first showed these pictures i had many comments, but they were all pretty drab; "Incredible, awesome, good work, or what's the plug in to do that ? "
As nice as this may be i need more in depth criticism to go further and somehow i always find myself coming here for that.
Thank you very much for taking the time to do so, i really, really appreciated it.
You're absolutely right Bud i chose the kids that had the best features to start with in my opinion, especially the first one that was just too perfect downright to the hair style much like puppet's hair and it made things easier for me.
I haven't showed the pictures to the parents, i would have to track them first since i was working for some one for that shoot but i could easily get a hold of them. I'm pretty sure the parents would get a chuckle out of them, but i fear the kids wouldn't like to see them as cartoons. At that age the looks and what their posse think's of them is everything. But i'll most probably get them printed and post them to the parents of something.
John Caldwell wrote:
Very interesting exercise, and I don't doubt that there are many aspects to doing this as well as you have here. The second image's dodging and burning about the lower face does not seem right to me, as it creates a smudginess that looks neither like dirt or natural shadow. Although I'm not really a trained observer in this area, your first portrait looks great to me as is.
John Caldwell
Hello John, i totally agree with you, i'm learning as i go along and i found out there is a fine threshold between a beauty shot and a cartoon like one, both have similar techniques and it takes a lot of observations and pull backs and many breaks to keep your mind set on the desired effect. Strangely after a few hours on working on either one of them i just couldn't see the effect anymore, i had to take a break, go do something else, gather my creative thoughts and then come back with fresh eyes and continue for an hour or so.
I did do a less intense version of the second portrait and in my view it looked a lot less cartoony and more like an over processed beauty shot. As i started working on this particular one i was surprised to see just how beaten up the kid's hands looked; Dirty and chewed off fingernails, dry and cracked fingers plus a big color difference. It sort of became my starting point and i was hoping to give a grungier look to the whole image. Namely i've given a lot more details to the ball, intentionally increased finger tips' size. I also raised both eyebrows to make him look a little more "Devilish" All these transformation are really attempts and experimentations of different possibilities to try to increase the cartoon look, obviously not everything worked towards that goal, your keen observation helps me realize it even more.
This being said here's the other more subtle version of portrait #2, perhaps you will like it more, i just find the cartoon effect less obvious.
friscoron wrote:
I'm with both Bud and John. I absolutely love what you're doing here, but as someone who knows nothing about creating this cartoon effect, I agree with John on the dark areas on the face. They just don't look right to me. My other suggestion would be the hair. The hair looks real, but the face does look largely cartoonish. I come from old school, where in the comics the hairs had some outline but very little detail. The second kid has really good hair for creating splotches, I don't know if it makes any sense to you, but it makes perfectly good sense to me. :-)
Thank you very much for your input as well dear friscoron, i completely understand you point about the darker zones and i've posted the tone down version above. About the hair, well what can i say that's when i hit the wall. I drew a complete blank on what to do at this point. On the 1st portrait the little guy already puppet like straight clean hair i didn't have to work too much on it, just playing with a few curves and levels mask, but when i tried it on the 2nd portrait it just didn't work. I tried de saturating, adding gaussian and/or surface blur etc it just looked worse and worse after every attempts. I still have to figure out that part and i will keep working on it until i find something that works.
I can't count how many times i've asked myself what i was trying to do during the lengthy process, i sort of came up with a definition: It has to look like a drawing enhanced to the point that it looks like a picture. Funny but that's how i have to go about it, instead of thing in terms of a photo that has to look like a drawing for it to work for me. For a simple drawing effect there's a least one plug in for that (Toonit) and it's really not what i was going for, this being said there must be a way to make the hair look more in sync with the rest of the image, i suppose i have yet to find out how :-)
Thanks again for your accurate observation and fine comment.
Steady Hand wrote:
I was thinking almost the same things!
The darker areas in the face do make the second boy's face look "sunken" or "dirty."
Ron's comment on the hair is also something that I saw. I believe you need to make the entire image "cartoonish" rather than just the face.
I also appreciate the effort (time, skill, attention to detail) that this kind of work requires.
Also thank you to you Steady Hand, i totally agree the effect should be event (constant) throughout the whole picture, i will try my best to improve the hair part, there must be a way, it is for me to find it :-)
Your second edit looks much better to me in facial toning along the chin region. I do think you have given up somme of the cartoonish aspect in the cheeks and under-eye areas. There may also still be some room to render the hair differently, along the lines of Friscoron's prior suggestion.
John Caldwell wrote:
Your second edit looks much better to me in facial toning along the chin region. I do think you have given up somme of the cartoonish aspect in the cheeks and under-eye areas. There may also still be some room to render the hair differently, along the lines of Friscoron's prior suggestion.
Very nice.
John Caldwell
That's what i think, it looks better in a way once toned down but it looses some of the cartoon effect. I''m searching the web at the moment trying to find something for the hair. Like Arnold would say: "I'll be back"