2D or 3D? When to use each for client presentations
It’s a question most garden designers face at some point: should I present my design in 2D or spend more time and money and go for 3D?
There’s no single right answer — it depends on your client, your budget, your workflow, and the story you’re trying to tell. Both have their place, and understanding when to use each can make the difference between a confused client and a confident one.
Why 2D still matters
Plans, sections, and elevations have been the language of design for centuries — and for good reason. They’re precise, efficient, and communicate intent clearly to contractors and suppliers. A plan drawing forces you to make firm design decisions about alignment, scale, and dimension, and for minor amendments or conceptual sketches, 2D can be faster to produce than modelling everything in 3D. Landscapers rely on scaled plans and elevations for accurate pricing and setting out, so it can save time in the longer term by not bothering to jump into 3D. Also some clients prefer the neatness of a printed plan — it feels tangible, easy to mark up, and less “techy”, which can be the case with renders sometimes.
However, some people can’t easily visualise space from a flat plan. Even with labels and textures, the result can feel distant if a client isn’t able to easily visualise themselves in a space. A 2D drawing can show what you’ve designed, but not how it feels to stand there - it’s much easier to sell a story and sell in a lifestyle that could be theirs with a 3D model and all the props that it can use. Plus of course complex topography and steps can be difficult to explain without a 3D model or perspective.
In short: 2D is for detail, measurement, and decision-making. It’s the backbone of your design documentation — but not always the best storytelling tool.
When 3D does the heavy lifting
3D, on the other hand, speaks directly to the imagination - it lets clients experience the space as if they were walking through it. It shows proportion, materials, light, and mood — things 2D drawings can only hint at. Seeing a design in 3D helps clients highlight things they like or don’t like early on in the design process, saving revisions later. Shadows, textures, and planting can evoke the feeling of the finished garden, building excitement and trust, and giving a realistic impression of what they can expect. And of course we can pepper our visuals with aspirational touches - a bowl of fruit on the table, a pot of tea and a stack of magazines by the sofa, a dog playing on the lawn - all those things that will make them buy-in to your proposal.
On the downside, s a significant investment of your time and potentially profit in a job, especially if you’re new to the technology involved. Outsourcing is of course possible, but that too can take a big chunk of your profits, especially high end renders. There’s also a risk that some clients focus too much on materials or colours rather than layout and function, zoning in on things they don’t like or on planting that you’d meant to just use as green filler but they perceive as being indicative of the final product.
In short, 3D is for storytelling and exploration. It brings your ideas to life — but it shouldn’t replace the technical accuracy of your 2D drawings.
Finding the right balance
Most successful designers use both — just at different stages.
In concept development, quick 3D massing can help test forms and levels, while a 2D plan clarifies proportion. Later, 3D visuals help the client fall in love with the space, and 2D drawings turn that vision into something buildable.
At Digital Landscapes, we often find that pairing a clear plan with just a few carefully chosen 3D views gives the best of both worlds. Clients understand the layout, landscape contractors get the information they need, and nothing gets overcomplicated.