Hello !
The images are the same in 2d and 3d editions as Barefootlife pointed out.
But the cardstock is different.
I find the cardstock of the 3d mass market edition very disapointing compared to the 1st 1nd 2d artist éditions.
The cardstock is much thinner, so much so that the nice sturdy box is notably shallower for the 3d edition compared to the size it was for the first two. If you put the three decks side by side on a table, you will see that the heights of the 1st and 2d edition decks are comparable, but for the 3d edition the stack of cards is much shorter, because the cards are so much thinner. And the difference in box size tells all.
Then, it depends what type of cardstock you prefer. I get that some riffler shufflers will prefer the 3d edition because the cardstock is more pliable.
For me, I prefer thick luxurious carstock, so the 3d edition feels flimsy and I do not use it, I merely keep it as a replacement should I loose a card, and for the book.
My fave is the 1st, both for the images and the splendid cardstock quality.
Second fave is the 2d, the cardstock is slightly thinner thant the 1st, but still superior quality and a true pleasure to handle.
3d edition point blank disapointed me with its thin cardstock - the special feeling that went with the two artist editions is completely lost IMO, and that's a shame. I would certainly not be as much in love as I am with this deck, if I only owned the mass market version.
If cardstock is important for you, you might want to get a 2d edition while it is still available (I would, but because I am nuts about cardstock - the feeling a decks gives me in my hands is as important as the visuals for me). And I say it again : tastes differ, some people do prefer the 3d edition carstock.....
I hope that helps !