Proposal: 3D Graphics, Modeling & Applications

The most popular sites on this topic (CG Talk and CG Arena) went with CG over 3D. I'm wondering if this isn't a good move - especially since when you say "3D" these days, people start thinking Avatar and funky plastic glasses.

It seems possible that this might help the site's progress into beta, if more expert minds in the industry were to take it more seriously with a name more in line with the industry norm.

  • 1
    Kara, didn't you ask a similar question previously? Or was it someone else I'm thinking of?
    – John C
    Jul 1, 2011 at 16:04
  • Ah, just saw your new comment about changing the title, not widening the proposal. Unfortunately, I can no longer edit the title now that it's in commitment phase - although I suppose we could petition a moderator to do so.
    – John C
    Jul 1, 2011 at 16:07
  • I have no idea what's best, just had the thought and wondered if I threw it at the wall, might it stick? ;) I'm dyin to find a way to get this off the ground. Jul 4, 2011 at 13:01
  • I think 3D is most appropriate. I understand your reasoning regards to CG vs 3D from a general view, but I think 3D is more specific and understandable to those who are actually going to use it. Jul 26, 2011 at 16:35
  • @KaraMarfia Since 3d graphics' been shut down you might be interested in the 2 new proposals: one for blender and another for cg-artist. The former one's already in the commit stage.
    – greatwolf
    Jan 22, 2013 at 1:17

2 Answers 2


It's true. Specifying 3D would exclude many of the brilliant 2D artists. But maybe that is what we want?

  • If the site is to be dedicated to 3D modeling and animation, then we should keep the name.

  • But if we want to open it to those who do their work in 2D then we should probably switch.

It really depends on the goal of this proposal.

  • 1
    I was referring more to the terminology, not really vs 2D. Computer generated graphics specifically, since people associate 3D so strongly with display lately. Jul 1, 2011 at 16:00
  • 7
    There are 3D focused communities that have been around for many years now (Renderosity, etc), and the memberships of those communities are in the millions - and that's just in English. Broaden it to include the even larger number of 2D focused computer graphics communities (think Photoshop, Illustrator, etc), then this stack would lose its meaning to the 3D set. Jul 26, 2011 at 16:53
  • 1
    I think mixing 2D and 3D would be an error. its really 2 different fields with a different artists base. Its akin to making a single Q&A stack for painters and sculptors Oct 21, 2011 at 15:18
  • Well then I agree with all of you. 3D is the way to go as opposed to CG, 2D, 2.5D, ABCD, and eD (2.71D)
    – Peaches491
    Jun 5, 2012 at 15:23

CG as "computer graphics" isn`t precise and is highly contextual. it may refer to any imagery done on a computer (2D graphics, photoshop and the like is already covered in anothe Q&A site). In movie, we refer as CG anything that was done using computer (which usually happens to be 3D work, or special FX)

I would say 3D is the proper term to use.

Here is a non extensive list of 3D software product (or DCC - digital content creation) : Maya, 3ds Max, Softimage, Blender, Modo, Rhino, Sketchup, C4D, Houdini, Lightwave, etc.

Artists using them will call themselves 3D artists, (which includes modelers, animators, riggers, texturers etc.). These artists are the expert base for this Q&A site.

To get back to 3D movies, we usually refer to stereo imagery/movies, stereoscopy, anaglyphs. I would simply consider this one of the numerous topics covered on this Q&A site.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .