Help me that way I'll waste no more time.

[kenzomatic]

Grey Acumen said:
actually it has to do with the fact that a silhouette is exactly the same from the front and the back, so there are always 2 ways to interpret any nondefined image. further more, the third dimension can only be extrapolated from visual cues on a 2 dimensional media, since our only cue is that movement is happening, but no shaodows or lines or features tell us anything more, we are left open on which direction to extrapolate.

naznatips said:

kenzomatic said:
^OK and nothing you see in movies is actually moving its just a series of frames. What are you trying to say?

It looks to me to be a 3d character rotating. The silhouette is what causes the illusion.

You don't understand.  Everything you view in motion on a digital medium is viewed in frames, but some things are actual digital 3D models and some things are not.  Hence the difference between 2D and 3D.  This is not a 3D rendered object, but a series of 2D objects.  Sorry if that wasn't clear in my last post. 

Grey is right and I think you missunderstand. It looks to me to be created using 3d software specifically Poser. I do not think these frames where made by hand. (maybe edited but not created)

http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php?p=27

They are saying that the image is 2d which of course it is. I am talking about how it is made.

If you have a link saying how it was created I would like to see it. To me it reaks of a 3D ap.