So what is distortion guys? Anywhere there's caricatures, there's people talking about caricatures, and anytime a bunch of people talk about caricatures long enough, somebody drops the word distortion like some word sulsa. So I wanna figure it out here.
If we define "exaggeration" as being separate from likeness, than we can use the word "distortion." If I can say "the exaggeration on that caricature is a ten," and you don't see the caricature I'm talking about, and what I've just said gives you no insight at all as to the likeness of the drawing I'm referring to, you would be defining exaggeration as separate from likeness. I say "there's a lot of exaggeration," but your answer would be, "but is it good exaggeration? Is it correct?" Because if it's not, than it's just a lot of distortion. I think the math would be like this.
So every time there is less likeness than there is exaggeration, there is distortion present. If exaggeration is 10 and likeness is 0, than distortion is 10 also. Distortion = Exaggeration in that case. This also means it's possible for there to be negative distortion if the likeness ends up being greater than the exaggeration. Hm. Negative distortion. I'm still trying to make sense of that.
If you don't like the idea of negative distortion, you could try this on for size.
Division. But how do you feel about a drawing with perfect exaggeration and perfect likeness having a distortion quotient of 1? Yeah. I'm not to crazy about that either. But I like the idea of how the level of distortion gets closer and closer and closer to zero as the likeness gets bigger and exaggeration gets smaller. But all of this is just ridiculous anyway, because the idea of distortion is completely useless, if you ask me. If you ask me, good exaggeration=good likeness; bad exaggeration=bad likeness and vice versa.