After going through the process of creating a 2D line drawing and translating it in to 3D, then working freely and creatively only in 3D, and my past experience with only 2D I feel I have better insight into the making process.
I cannot say one kind of making is better than the other, I think they are all valid and all work best for a specific kind of final outcome desired. The goal is learning all of them, and the things they offer, in order to best pick what making process will take you to your goal.
In a 2D to 3D process more planing is involved. This process is therefore best when working on a large scale project with high stakes, meaning we cannot experiment too much when making since it would be a bad decision to risk failing in a large project. This form of making allows you to, somewhat, predict and explore the final outcome of a 3D piece with less risk for failure.
A strictly 3D process is adventurous. It is creative. You have an idea in your mind and the only way to give it justice is by creating a 3D model without the restrictions of a 2D plan. This making process elicits active learning through experience, and so as we make we understand our idea in the form they will be in. This is riskier since we are using real materials to essentially prototype. However, a 3D process requires attention, creativity, and adaptability, which can yield incredibly creative pieces. Bellow are the images of a 3D only making process:
A strictly 2D process is the most common. It is safe, however it does not need to be boring. This safety can allow for immense exploration without fear and risk, and can therefore yield complex two-dimensional works. It is a shame to interpret this safety as unchallenging, 2D can be used as a sturdy ground for developed creation.
