Is this considered copyright infringement? (Lawyers help preferred)?

If it is similar enough to the original thing to be considered "derivative" of it, then it is technically speaking copyright infringement. However, I wouldn't necessarily panic in practice.

If it's done in private and not shared, that's legal. If it's posted publicly, then as Yeti described, it's technically a copyright violation. However, people post fan art and all that stuff online every day, and almost nobody ever gets sued for this sort of thing. It would hurt them more in the negative publicity than they'd be able to get out of her, even if they found out about it.

You're describing a derivative work, which still requires the permission of the copyright holder.

It's within the educational fair use exception for your friend to do this for her own private learning purposes. However, if she starts sharing it with others, such as by posting it online, she impacts the market for the original work, and is committing copyright infringement. It doesn't matter that she's not selling it.

It isn't a copyright infringement if the image or copyrighted material is changed by 20% or more. I would guess that this would meet that criteria.

nothin is considered copyright. if you want the big picture, the world is to damn big to consider something copyright. do what you do, its not copyright, just dont take a picture drawn/made from the internet and repost it FOR SALES PURPOSES. you can remake it and sale it. but other then that its not copy right.

Avril Lavigne always has and always will suck and that's a fact. Her hardcore fans deserve to suffer!

you mean to sell it? I don't think so. As I had an exhibition of a portrait of a celebrity when I was like 12. I don't particularly enjoy portraits of celebrities, but I don't think it's a copyright infringement, besides, what person would report a portrait or art in general? It's art. Art is all good.

No it's not.

If she is keeping it for her own use, no worries.