Studying at the Newark School of Fine and Industrial Art, one of the things our teachers impressed upon us was that, if we wanted to do portraits, we should practice doing caricatures. One can master all the techniques of drawing and painting, but caricature is a technique all its own. For some, it's a gift. I had a fellow student in art school who could look at anybody and quickly draw their caricature. He was so good; he could have worked for Mad magazine. Unfortunately, he lacked the motivation to continue in school.

Group shot of retirees (Ink and brush, markers, airbrush, on cold press illustration board)

When I worked for a corporate art department, I would get the occasional request for a caricature of someone who was retiring or leaving the company. What influenced me when I started doing caricatures at work was the philosophy of Mort Drucker, who does a lot of the MAD Magazine television and movie parodies.

He avoids the "big head/little body" type of caricature, and tries to make his subjects as natural as possible. He captures the actor's posture and gestures as well as his or her likeness. He's also great at drawing hands; like Steve Ditko, he knows that gestures add to a caricature. He's also a trained comic book artist, and has the ability tell a story using sequential art. This means that his caricatures don't stand around mouthing words; they are dynamic images moving the parody along.

Equally effective was the late Al Hirschfeld. With few simple lines, he could render any celebrity. It looks easy, until you try it yourself.

Since the inception of the World Wide Web, I've learned to avoid the "official photo portrait." I usually try to work from a few different reference photos, and try to get a surreptitious look at the person themselves whenever I can. However, I once did a caricature from an "official photo" I found on the internet, and then later met the subject. In person, she was softer looking and hardly resembled her photograph. Official portraits are for book jackets, not caricaturists.

I thought this photograph of Bill Murray on the cover of the New York Times Magazine was pretty interesting. I think he's one of the funniest people alive today. (His brother, Brian, is pretty funny, too.) I thought I'd try to do a pen and ink caricature of him. I started out with a 6H pencil ­ with hard lead for light, easy-to-erase lines - and did a sketch on cold press illustration board.

This is the first attempt. Apparently, somebody felt that Bill's face wouldn't be interesting enough by itself, so little fake flowers were put in his beard in the photograph. I avoided this gimmick and did a straight sketch. It was an accurate portrayal, but it wasn't a portrait of Bill Murray. What makes Bill Murray funny to me is his deadpan delivery, and the fact that his eyes have a lot of mischief behind them. I decided to try another sketch, exaggerating his eyes a bit this time.

I was a lot happier with the second attempt. Aside from the fact that his eyes are more expressive, He also has a hint of a smile about his mouth. Sometimes, an artist with a pencil can portray someone more accurately than a camera can. The next step was to ink the pencils.

I used a Windsor Newton number 3 sable watercolor brush with Higgins ink. I wasn't happy with the results, although I found this version makes a very good "thumbnail" when it's reduced ten percent. I felt the brush lines were too thick. Another attempt at inking was needed.

Using tracing paper, I transferred the sketch onto another illustration board and inked again, using a Number 2 Rapidograph pen for the shading. For some of the hair, and to spot my blacks, I used the aforementioned Windsor Newton brush. Usually, an artist can say a lot more with an expressive brush line than with a Rapidograph pen's, but I use the pen as I would a hard-lead pencil. I find that if I take my time with the lines and cross-hatching, pen work can also be expressive.