Comments on: Turn any old image into a 19th century woodcut.

Turn any old image into a 19th century woodcut.

Colloquial Collision — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 21:09:51 -0800

Fantastic Photoshop Engraving Technique! A bit of work, with astonishing results.

By: Hands of Manos

Hands of Manos — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 21:21:46 -0800

That's neat but the problem is that when I log into Adobe Forums it shows the technique deleted. I'd really like to see the process.

By: glider

glider — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 21:23:56 -0800

Read more than just the first page of the thread, it's explained in detail. Time consuming but not difficult.

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 21:41:16 -0800

Meh. Not so kewl.

By: Jairus

Jairus — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 21:46:08 -0800

Meh^2

By: mathowie

mathowie — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 21:49:20 -0800

That looks pretty cool. I always wondered how anyone did that.

By: Hands of Manos

Hands of Manos — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:07:24 -0800

cool > MCD or Jairus' "meh"

By: Balisong

Balisong — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:14:38 -0800

This'll make those Fark photoshop "contests" that much more sucky!!

By: paultron

paultron — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:22:29 -0800

I guess this is cool. But I've never really understood the desire to mimic hand-made techniques with photoshop. Those images are kind of cool, but they're nothing like etchings. (As a printmaker, I would say that the best part about woodcuts, etchings, and other forms of printmaking is the mistakes, the uneven quality, and the humanness of it.) Maybe I'm just old fashioned, though. (Or maybe I'm just a big ol' art snob.)

By: page404

page404 — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:24:52 -0800

The 'artist' says he based the technique on these tutorials. Would be fun but I'd need to install photoshop to use it and I'm a PSP'er.

By: lightweight

lightweight — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:36:55 -0800

The effect is surprisingly modern for an age old art.

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:38:19 -0800

Does anyone know how the Wall Street Journal does their little woodcut-style portraits of article authors and subjects? I find it hard to believe they're made by hand (meaning, something along the lines of this guy's tutorial, which requires a lot of personal attention to work with the masking and the angles), but I couldn't think of any software that would be able to pick up on the facial curves and give such nice results.

By: monju_bosatsu

monju_bosatsu — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:52:14 -0800

odinsdream: She could probably tell you. Read more about "hedcuts" here.

By: mecran01

mecran01 — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:57:01 -0800

Done by hand! Probably outsourced to Asia soon!

By: DyRE

DyRE — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 23:30:35 -0800

Whoa, I dig that splash image on Noli Novak's site.

By: Timeless

Timeless — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:30:27 -0800

I've never really been a fan of applying filters on photographs to create the illusion of artistic hand renderings. So I would have to agree with Paultron on this. I do sometimes use the technique in my own illustrations, but it is a lot easier in a vector application such as Illustrator or Expression. Expression even has a special tool for this kind of effect. (See Dazzling Effect Lines) personally, I prefer to use the lesser known Xara for this type of drawings and it pretty much involves the use of blending calligraphic styled lines together. Though you could simulate wood engravings using this technique, I prefer to go for mathematical perfection since they basically are digital illustrations and I don't see the point in pretending that they where created by any other means. The other important benefit is that since your illustration is in a vector format, it is always scalable.

By: jeremias

jeremias — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 07:19:48 -0800

Does anyone know how the Wall Street Journal does their little woodcut-style portraits of article authors and subjects? I've always wondered about that too, and with a little google-fu, it turns out it's all analog. There's also Andromeda's Cutline Filter which attempts to do the same thing digitally.

By: the theory of revolution

the theory of revolution — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 07:20:05 -0800

I have a non-sexual crush on photoshop, and this just makes it worse.

By: gwint

gwint — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 07:35:16 -0800

Very impressive. I'm continually astounded at what people can contort Photoshop into doing.

By: TimTypeZed

TimTypeZed — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 08:06:06 -0800

odinsdream: She could probably tell you. Or he. I don't think the quality of his drawing - often dependent, especially in his portraiture, on subtle distortion - can be found in a box. Although, like many others, he may have adapted his methods to digital means.

By: crunchland

crunchland — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:38:34 -0800

neato. I've always liked those woodcut images of authors at the B&N. The only complaint I have is that, at least on my screen, when I scroll the linked page with the images on it, they flicker. Probably the fault of my video card or screen or even my browser, but still.

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:12:10 -0800

Thanks for the links to Noli's work, that really is fantastic! I especially like this one, it's got that Escher flair to it.

By: Termite

Termite — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 13:51:48 -0800

You're talking about this without mentioning Drew Friedman? Sorry, these links just give a hint of the stipple faces he's known for.

By: disgruntled

disgruntled — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 14:35:41 -0800

Odinsdream – I'm not sure if it's the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times, but Mark Summers does the portraits for one those papers along with Barnes and Noble. He's represented by Richard Solomon. Some of his work can be seen here and it's all done by hand (not mouse). http://www.richardsolomon.com/

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 18:36:11 -0800

Oops, apologies for the badly-linked image in my previous post. Just visit her splash page to see it. Tables for layout = Unnecessary.