>3D animation is easier/cheaper/more efficient than traditional 2DJust kill yourself if you think this.
>>643259MFW got into 3D for animation, Decided to be a generalist to make and rig my own models.>It'll be perfect if i do it myself.MFW after years of learning and doing other shit have less time animating than modeling-rigging etcMFW getting gud at 2D drawing and starting to do traditional animation.MFW enjoys it and loosing more interest in 3D....FML
It legitimately is thoWhy the fuck do you think shitty Netflix animes are all doing it
>>643259More efficient would probably be the only debatable point. 3D's ultimately the route taken for a lot of current animations simply because 3D animation is comparatively easier to outsource to India or whatever slavefarm of your choice. You just need enough talent to make one good model, then you can pass it over to the animation goons. 2D animation on the other hand requires much more work in getting things to look consistent through and throughout if you want a good product. Plus, 3D assets are easily purchasable. You more or less have to make everything for your 2D animation from scratch. Of course, this is assuming the 3D stuff you refer to is the kinda stuff they air nowadays on kids' channels and/or netflix cartoons being compared to traditional drawn-frame-by-frame 2D. The only way 2D would be cheaper would be if the 2D were some Flash-based nonsense and the only way 3D would be more expensive is if we were talking Pixar-level productions where you're accounting for much more in terms of quality.
>>643296The best 3D animations look like shit compared to the best 2D animations.Try to make akira in 3D or paprika.
>>643298>you can't compare animation to animationok retard.>but 3D is diferentand it looks like cheap pajeet trash every fucking time.>but disneythey can't even animate strands of hair or shit like skirts.
>>643297Akira and Paprika aren't the best 2D animations and you're a trog if you think otherwise. Get some fucking culture.
>>643300>>643302>>643303https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooKBenGK3R4you can't even do this in 3D, not even with disney budgets.
>>643304Of course that it's possible.
>>643299>>you can't compare animation to animation>ok retard.Except you really can't. They're in the same medium so I'm willing to say it's more of an apples-to-peaches thing, but the techniques used in both almost border mutual exclusivity. The underlying concept of knowing how to keyframe motion exists between the two, but that doesn't mean a 2D animator will be able to animate in 3D, and vice versa. Their outputs almost always look entirely different, unless you're looking at 3D trying to replicate 2D, then you have some area to compare them to.>>but 3D is diferent>and it looks like cheap pajeet trash every fucking time.>>but disney>they can't even animate strands of hair or shit like skirts.Honestly just sounds like you don't even watch anything else except whatever constitutes your definition of "2D animation". Disney here isn't referring to their ancient Mickey Mouse nonsense, it's their current day 3D animated films. Little known fact, since you wanted to bring anime films up: Don't you know 3D's heavily used in anime production today? Sure, the tech might not have been efficient for use in Akira or Paprika, but they'll happily abuse 3D techniques in today's anime simply because it's efficient and it works the best. Hell, they're even making anime with 3D software now!
>>643296>>643297>>643298>>643299>>643300>>643302>>643303>>643304>>643313>>643314>>643343>this whole fucking argument Holy shit it's like /v/irgins talking about the new RTX cards and real time ray tracing. One bullshit post after the other, one side trying to sound smart to the other while both have literally no fucking idea about how anything actually works.
it is easier/faster to make limited 3d animation than limited 2d animation
>>643259>This warrants its own thread.Just kill yourself if you think this.
Find me a single 3D game that looks even half as good as anything Vanillaware puts out.
>>643554Is this bait?
>>643379how about forced animation
Here's the facts for anyone listening:3D requires more knowledge, and you need a ton of time to set things up properly, but once set up you can create an order of magnitude more content.2D requires more skill, takes no time to set things up, but nothing can be copied from scene to scene, and any changes mid production mean everything needs to be scrapped and redone.3D is better for large projects that need to evolve mid production IE professional work2D is better for small projects being directed by a single person with a strong vision IE indie workWant to know a secret? 2D and 3D aren't exclusive. 3D Characters with a 2D background works great for dialogue heavy works, draw a scene in a second then animate subtle facial expressions with 2 clicks of a mouse and tweak to your hearts content. 2D Characters with a 3D background works great for action heavy works. Make your camera do pirouettes around the scene then animate all the squishy, stretchy, tendon snapping choreography you want.In response to OP: 2D is cheaper and more efficient, if your animation is less than 3 minutes long.Easy doesn't mean anything.
>>643259that's something people who use default rigs would say
>>643554anything vanillaware puts out because they're 3D engines with billboard models rather than 2D sprites :)
>>644499Fuck you faggot you dont know shit about animating
>>643259It is literally all of those things you fucking idiot. The only argument you might have is easier.
>Still posting reddit memes in 2018Just kill yourself
>>643259no you.3D enables you to get perfect perspective and millimeter precise details, can't do that in 2D.
Lets see:>2DCost per frame depending on complexityDigital versus analog workflow is really whatever past the age of mass produced photocopy tools>3DCost PER model depending on complexity, and a cost per animation depending on complexity. You can make this into a graph. The more stuff you want, 2D is cheaper. If you just want the same models doing the same "things" 3D is going to be cheaper. In both cases, money is the core limitation to how much quality & art there can be.There is also things like using 3D to create frames for painting, features in movies such as Disney's Tarzen and any modern anime. Depending on how deep it goes, it goes from a glorified paint over of 3D to 3D as a canvas for true art in motion.Even in anime, where 3D and 2D live side by side, its hard to actually tell them apart once you go beyond shit quality. 2D allows for a lot of off model and transformations/transitions. 3D allows for things to be on model.
>>643259It is tho. But it's also shittier
>>643259The thought is “I don’t have to draw this over and over, keeping scale and angles in mind the entire time” in my mind the best way to speed up production is to use both 2d and 3d. Have the background and certain assets animated in 3d and then add the 2d animation on top of it via editing software.
>>645014I didn’t see this post before I replied, you’re completely right. I think using both is a good way to cut cost and time.
>>643259I guess major studios are all shifting to 3d just for the banter
>>643259Imagine this- you want a crowd that can be used in a range anime that you're about to animate.>2D>Draw all the frames one by one in different perspectives, different poses, different colors per anime.>3D>Model once>Easy perspective>Interpolated animations>Color swap clothes and hair>Want more crowd? Duplicate!