It's taken me a while to do this exercise as I struggled to find suitable images that weren't too big so that I could enlarge them 2.5 times. Luckily my daughters Guide magazine came to the rescue.
 |
| becomes.... |
Which I sort of like. Then to simplify the image:
Which I think is reasonably clear. (Am I allowed to say that I prefer the design in black (or grey) and white?)
Second attempt is:
I really like the original image, it's simple, it has punch, and it makes sense with the story though I guess it is a bit stereotypical and maybe not entirely appropriate for a young audience. I think that because I like the original I haven't simplified it enough in my rough which looks like an illustration in it's own right.
Further simplification gives me this which may be a bit sketchy. If I was a client I might be a bit wary of commissioning an image on the basis of this, it would need to be an established illustrator that I trusted.
Note
I'm really sorry, but if you produced these pictures I can't credit whoever you are because you are not named in the magazine. This makes me really cross, I use other peoples work here to understand what they have done and to learn from them, they should take credit for what they have created. If anyone looks at work that has been produced it should be possible for them to find out who the artist was so that they can commission work of their own if they so choose. It is unthinkable that an author of a written piece is not credited or the musicians on a record and film credits list
everyone. What is the problem with illustrators?
