Family Pants and I got a great write up on Thinking Animation Book blog the other day! Angie Jones is an accomplished 3-D artist running that blog as well as this site selling flowers for your hair!
Thanks Angie!
Although I’m a 2-D-Flash-kind of guy, I always wondered what Family Pants would look like in 3-D…

Here’s a question for you 3-D peoples. Is 3-D advantageous over 2-D?
I’d think, it would be easier to pair talented, yet totally differently styled artists together yet still keep the production consistant. In other words, if you take a guy like me and a guy who’s great at drawing Spiderman and put them next to each other in a production, we’d have to adapt our styles to match each other to work well together. (Hey, that’s animation… I’d think this difficult aspect is why some animation productions opt for a “crude” style. They’d call it “hip” or “minimal” and some would call it “bad art”, but really it’s a practical way to make it easier to adapt to.)
But, in 3-D, since we’re manipulating a 3-D model, our “styles” wouldn’t matter. You can hire the guy or gal you want, rather than the one guy who works well in your style or spend time training a person to adapt.
I mentioned this to a couple 3-D artists and they countered with the time you save “training to adapt” would be spent building models.
But still, after the model is built, wouldn’t it be faster to manulipulate a model than draw frame by frame?
I guess the only real way to settle the debate would be to buy the book Angie wrote, learn 3-D, make something then compare! It’d be a kind of animation John Henry race!