Welcome! 👋 Thanks for opening your first issue here! And to ensure the community is able to respond to your issue, please make sure to fill out the inputs in the issue forms. Thank you!

Thanks for filing this issue! I think it makes a lot of sense, especially since most other p5 methods let you specify a z coordinate when you go from 2D to 3D.

I think the biggest challenge in implementing this will be in reading the arguments list properly. I think the new method signature would be:

image(img, x, y, [z], [width], [height])

image(img, dx, dy, [dz], dWidth, dHeight, sx, sy, [sWidth], [sHeight], [fit], [xAlign], [yAlign])

I think it should still be unambiguous to parse it out though since we're just adding one new optional number in the start (adding two would probably make clashes the longer form of image().)