animation For animation, what do you prefer 2d and 3d for?

[Plonkett 341]

I prefer 2d for organic character animation, various effects (like water, fire, dust, explosions, lightning, etc), painted backgrounds, deep canvas style texturing, and other organic animation. I prefer 3d for robots, vehicles, machinery, props, large creatures, complex environments, action shots, CGI effects, references for 2d animation, etc.

Edited March 26, 2021 by vgmaster9

[JMTV99 1,348]

2d: characters and backgrounds

 

3d: special effects.

 

I still prefer 2d.

[Splashee 28,538]

A good 3D show can easily outrank a 2D show. Art style isn't everything.

 

I prefer 2D. But looking at older hand drawn shows (Batman the animated series, Sonic SatAM), or newer stylized shows (Kim Possible), and comparing them to the extremely high quality that My Little Pony Friendship is Magic had to offer by using Flash (which is computer generated 2D art), it becomes difficult to just group them all together into one perfect animation category.

Then of course, we have Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss just beating the crap out of any 3D I have seen.

 

For 3D, I have never hated the TMNT 2012 series more because it had rap in it. Mixing 3D, rap, cellphone culture, and all that, shouldn't be enough to just reboot the TMNT franchise. But it did, and it turned out the be a fan favorite. I only really liked it because of the 2D inside 3D show called Space-Heroes (animated by hand like old He-Man of the 80's), which was hilarious, and proved that they could indeed animate 2D:

(Sadly, most of it is gone from YouTube, because copyright, but you get to enjoy the 3D Turtles.... Yay?)

3D has an animation fluidity to it, that for some reason, got animated into super fast turning, over dramatic eye movements, and Toy Story characters that just keeps doing the same things to save money. Also, with all the modern movies beginning with Tangled, I just don't watch movies anymore.

[Oleks 1,983]

I don't have a preference. As long as the content is good, any format is fine. Although I must say I usually find 3D more spectacular and 2D more atmospheric.

[M0ssy 42]

I really like when 3D is done right, but I really prefer 2D animation, it just has something that really makes it more enjoyable to look at.

[Tom Gallagher 33,534]

Sometimes, 3D can become pretty interchangeable whereas with 2D, there seems to be more variety in style. 

[Brony Number 42 10,030]

1 hour ago, Splashee said:

over dramatic eye movements

That is something I hate about cg. The over exaggerated movements fall into the uncanny valley.

2D is my favorite. I like hand drawn, and I know they will be drawn on a tablet from now on. No more paper. But I can't argue with the results, like what I see in Japanese features.

But I also love Rocky and Bullwinkle, no matter how cheap it is. I love animation as an artform. 

I can get snobby about it. Classic hand drawn is like a gourmet meal, i requires a refined tasted. Pixar style shows are like cheap candy, people eat it up but there is no substance to it.

[Plonkett 341]

4 hours ago, Oleks said:

I don't have a preference. As long as the content is good, any format is fine. Although I must say I usually find 3D more spectacular and 2D more atmospheric.

You're not wrong there.

I personally don't consider 2d superior to 3d, nor do I see 3d as a replacement to 2d.

Edited March 26, 2021 by vgmaster9

[Adorable Lovestar 243]

I don't have a preference for one over the other. Both can be lovely, both require immense effort and precision, and both can convey information romantically and effectively.

[Cash In 21,627]

I definitely prefer 2D, because I feel that there's a lot more freedom in terms of animation and style, but that's not to say that 3D can't be good. If done properly, 3D animation can look seriously amazing.

[ExplosionMare 18,007]

With stuff I’ve seen in fan content, 3D is easier to make good than 2D animation. As for official stuff, I prefer traditional animation because it’s more impressive when it’s done right.

[baba_booey 4,299]

I'm going into animation myself and in general I prefer to work with 2D animation in general than 3D.

[ZiggWheelsManning 7,584]

2D animation, it is cute to look at and easier to draw  

[Dreambiscuit 8,248]

I prefer 2D for character animation, with natural painted backgrounds, and 3D for complex background (and foreground) objects that would be too complicated for hand drawn style.

I prefer 2D in general because I like to see the hand of the artist more prominently featured. I know it takes an artist to render 3D animation too, but for all its impressive realism it lacks the organic squash and stretch of 2D. Sometimes less realism is better, especially with animation where everything looks better caricatured and exaggerated. And seeing a hand-painted background is so enjoyable because I like to see the direct result of the artist’s brush. Anime has particularly impressive background art and sometimes I watch an anime just to look at the paintings on their own merits.

3D is good as a tool but it's overly relied upon for most animation these days.

[Tacodidra 59,974]

I prefer 2D in general. I feel it allows for bigger differences in style – a lot of characters in CGI-animated films look somewhat similar to me. Also, low-budget 3D animation has at least in the past often had an obvious cheap look to it, at its worst making the characters look plastic. Of course a low-budget 2D cartoon won't match the quality of a Disney movie or a Looney Tunes cartoon either, but with the right choices in design, you can still make it look decent enough or even use the crude designs to their advantage (I can't really imagine a CGI equivalent of what South Park does with its style).

I'd say 3D works best in high-budget feature films, especially those involving human characters. If it's something involving non-human characters, a lot of fantasy elements and visual comedy, 2D will be the better choice in most cases. Also if it's a character traditionally appearing in 2D works, I prefer to see it kept that way, and vice versa.