Are questions about "Is 2D dead?" basically a dead end ?

Yes . This sort of question is at best naive , at worst it's trolling
20% (3 votes)
No. I love trolling and a good forum brawl
7% (1 vote)
Who Cares? Ignore silly questions and just keep creating (2D , 3D, clay, etc. it's all good)
73% (11 votes)
Total votes: 15

Comments

Ken Davis's picture
Submitted by Ken Davis on

It just illustrates the naivete and confusion about the medium--something that a bit more reading or actual experience in the industry/craft can answer.
There's not harm in asking the question, but drawing conclusions based on assumption can create problems.

Bottom line is that the CRAFT of animation, and therefor the BUSINESS of animation is talent-based, so having/appreciating talent in ANY medium is what makes the business work.
If someone wants to hold to a belief that one medium has superseded others, then they are free to structure their career around that assumption. If they are wrong its to their detriment, not mine.

Heh, I've been called a dinosaur my young pups before.........but I'm STILL working in the biz and will be for the foreseeable future--so I guess my 2D skills still have a place in the scheme of things.
30 minutes more searching and reading on forums like AWN and other would supply insight enough to form an opinion that 2D, 3D et al are all thriving and being utilized. But the confusion persists....

Flipmcgee's picture
Submitted by Flipmcgee on

Mods should convert that thread into a sticky actually. I don't think it's automatically trolling, every year there'll be a fresh batch of animators-to-be who'll be asking this same question.

It takes time and money to get any meaningful training so I can see were that poster is coming from (based on his first post) with his blood-pressure elevating question.

beeblebrox's picture
Submitted by beeblebrox on

In the thread that doubtlessly inspired this one, it's trolling. When you start from a place thinking you know everything, more than people who actually work in the business, and you ask a question knowing that you're going to start trouble, that's the very definition of trolling.

beeblebrox's picture
Submitted by beeblebrox on

Mods should convert that thread into a sticky actually. I don't think it's automatically trolling, every year there'll be a fresh batch of animators-to-be who'll be asking this same question.

I think for the most part, there is a genuine curiosity and concern from would-be animators about which medium to focus on. It's a very fair and legitimate question. But that's not the case here. He came in with pre-conceived (and ignorant) notions and isn't at all interested in differing opinions on the subject. He knows 2D is dying and if you disagree with him, even if you work in the industry, you're "delusional."

addlepate's picture
Submitted by addlepate on

I think it's almost as silly to take questions of the sort seriously as it is to ask them in the first place. Why suffer fools? Why reward laziness and arrogance with assistance - or even responses? And I don't refer only to the sort of baiting that the last mouth-breathing dot-dot-dot-doofus did - I also extend my contempt to the question even if it's asked sincerely.

I'm a worthless wannabe with no credits to my name and, at present, not the slimmest chance of being accepted to the art school I'm aiming for, while everyone that I know who's my age is graduating from college; but even for someone as far removed as myself from the real world of the production of animation, all it takes is a modicum of common sense and artistic sensiblity to know that there's no limit at all to what can be done either in 2D or 3D - where there's sufficient talent and ample liberties - and that ultimately one's course is impelled by nothing of more significance than one's own taste. And if you're not exercising either your talent or your vision (or, ideally, both) then you may as well quit the industry for something far more lucrative.

It all seems so simple and straightforward to me that I cannot find anything redeeming in these exchanges other than their entertainment value as inadvertent jokes.

I mean, what kind of narrow, sub-human brain cannot comprehend - independently, without being lectured - that, no, a decade-and-a-half-long trend towards CG animation does not entirely negate almost a century of preceding hand-drawn history and momentum and, no, just because Disney is now an "entertainment" conglomerate that is more concerned with theme parks, "tween" bands and cruise lines than film does not mean that an entire artform has expired?

I don't see how the curiosity is justified, because it is predicated upon a wholly erroneous expectation that there can be such a thing as immutable security in employment or certainty in trends. If this were not the case, then they wouldn't be wasting time chewing over the same half-baked opinions again and again in an effort to plot-out the fail-safe plan for stability - they'd be using their time to improve their skills, towards whatever end excites them. But these haughty amateurs want to stake their success on anything other than themselves and their own skills, because, being so desperate for some guarantee, they are subconsciously driven to convince themselves that the matter of their success or failure hinges upon something bigger, something more unshakeable than themselves (which it doesn't). As a consequence, they so often become the rambling, devoted fan-boys of this-or-that style, trend, method, mode, technique or studio, deluding themselves that, armed with their superior opinion, they've elevated themselves into that current.

But actually, they stink. They are doomed to perpetual and inexorable mediocrity precisely because their constant fixation is external.

That having been said, I would never dream of barring the discussion from the forum. That last guy was the funniest thing I've read in weeks.

Black Spot's picture
Submitted by Black Spot on

It just needed custard pies at thirty paces and it would have been perfect. :D

Ken Davis's picture
Submitted by Ken Davis on

It just needed custard pies at thirty paces and it would have been perfect. :D

I don't use custard.

I use meringue--better kinetic "knock-down" energy, and a flatter ballistics path.

Black Spot's picture
Submitted by Black Spot on

I don't use custard.

I use meringue--better kinetic "knock-down" energy, and a flatter ballistics path.

But the splooge dripping effect down the face is more glorious with custard, surely?

Ken Davis's picture
Submitted by Ken Davis on

But the splooge dripping effect down the face is more glorious with custard, surely?

I can't help it, I've been trained to go for one blot, one spill; no exceptions.

DrSpecter's picture
Submitted by DrSpecter on

As one who has paid dearly and really suffered for my ignorance, I think that in terms of employability, it's a very legitimate question. And I don't quite agree with the popular opinion around here. I've gone way in debt to learn hand-drawn at an AWN-endorsed school, and basically gotten snubbed and told I'm unemployable in the medium for my efforts. I'm now going to tackle Flash head-on, for a hell of a lot less money, and I predict I'll fare considerably better.

Because hand-drawn was the only means of animation when they were figuring out the basics of character animation, people think it's the only legit way to do it. While I admit I have real limitations as an animator, I found that using animated masks in After Effects is pretty damn versatile. And, as a classmate put it, there's a real difference between loving to draw, and loving to draw the same thing over and over in slightly different positions. It's archaic, and it limits design possibilities.

You can work your way through a Flash book, and get a lot of low-paying freelance gigs, and you'll make the cost of the book back on the first job. I went tens of thousands of dollars in debt to learn hand-drawn... And I'm now going to work my way through a Flash book and try to get some freelance jobs. I really don't know if I'll ever pay that debt off.

You look at the job boards right here on AWN, and the term "Must Know Flash" is pretty much of a mantra. But if you want to do hand-drawn animation alone for a living without fear of long, long dry spells, you better be prepared to go to India or Korea and work for about $5 a week.

There are a lot of people around here who NEED to be a hell of a lot more responsible about the advice they give. This is NOT just an aesthetic or academic argument, and this isn't the best of all possible worlds. It's a nuts and bolts decision of what will make someone more employable. The difference it will make in someone's life is very real, I can tell you that for a fact.

I will not vote in the survey until the question is rephrased-- something a little less stupidly insulting would be nice.

phacker's picture
Submitted by phacker on

Are naive questions about "2D" vs. "3D" or "Is 2D dead?" basically a dead end ?

I'd have to say yes, all this was discussed probably 3 to 4 years ago. The whole question is old news. We've all said everything worth saying. If you are serious about hearing it...do a search.

Vineet's picture
Submitted by Vineet on

Is the word dead after you stopped writing by hand?

phacker's picture
Submitted by phacker on

Provide a story that many people care about, and characters that people relate to, and you have a winner, if not...back to the drawing board. Simple isn't it, but marketers have a problem with that. Doesn't matter if you render those characters in 3d or not. People have to care.

Vineet's picture
Submitted by Vineet on

Provide a story that many people care about, and characters that people relate to, and you have a winner, if not...back to the drawing board. Simple isn't it, but marketers have a problem with that. Doesn't matter if you render those characters in 3d or not. People have to care.

Well said.

I use the word 'connect' instead of care but end results could be similar. If people connect to my world (my fantasy) and they adopt just one character of my movie, I've won!