I have a few animations but I noticed that in IE and Edge my animations are slower and also one of the animations is not visible at all. It is just fine in chrome and Firefox. The box shadow is the one that is not visible at all. Any ideas why its not visible and why it is slower (looks like it is not as smooth)?
#keyframes fadeInAndOut {
17% {
opacity: 1;
box-shadow: 0 0 20px 23px #fff;
}
25% {
opacity: 0;
box-shadow: 0 0 31px 23px #fff;
}
92% {
opacity: 0;
box-shadow: none;
}
}
Smoothness:
with CSS animations/transitions you should always animate props that do not affect layout: transform and opacity. You could animate other things like margins and so but thread that does the job of CSS animations/transitions is not good with props that require layout recalculation. So, for box-shadow and anything other then transform and opacity use JavaScript animations.
Non-working animations:
Incorrect keyframe rule - animatable values in keyframes declaration should always be numeric (not things like none).
I am trying to create a loader animation using CSS3. Here is the code:
http://codepen.io/raaj-obuli/pen/RPeLer
If you look at the code, I've entered the css, in #keyframe defn, for rotating the squares from 0deg to 360deg ( as like below ). But the dices are not rotating. Please help on this and also let me know if you need more details.
#keyframes tilt{
0%{
transform: scale($scaleMin) rotate($rotateStart);
}
50%{
transform: scale($scaleMax);
background: #BC11FF;
box-shadow: 0 0 2px #D467FF;
}
95%,100%{
transform: scale($scaleMin) rotate($rotateEnd);
background: #11A8FF;
box-shadow: none;
}
}
PS. CSS is written using SCSS in the code sample.
It's missing the rotate() in 50% section.
$rotateMid: 225deg;/*added, adjust the value as needed*/
span {
animation: tilt #{$animDuration}s linear infinite; /*changed to linear*/
}
50%{
transform: scale($scaleMax) rotate($rotateMid); /*changed/added*/
}
Updated: http://codepen.io/anon/pen/QbJmbO?editors=110
Differences between the transition timing functions:
ease-in will start the animation slowly, and finish at full speed.
ease-out will start the animation at full speed, then finish slowly.
ease-in-out will start slowly, be fastest at the middle of the animation, then finish slowly.
ease is like ease-in-out, except it starts slightly faster than it ends.
linear uses no easing.
Source: https://stackoverflow.com/a/9636239/483779
Obligatory code, but the jsFiddle is demonstrating the issue exactly. I have a circle that expands and fades out over 3 seconds. Sonar style is my intention. The issue is on completion of the animation it "blinks" quickly then starts over.
See the issue here: http://jsfiddle.net/39MJL/3/
#-webkit-keyframes pulsate /* Safari and Chrome */{
0% {width:150px;height:150px;top:-178px;opacity:0.5;}
100% {width:900px;height:900px;top:-550px;opacity:0.1;border: 3px solid rgba(192, 61, 29, .9)}
}
#pulse1 { border-radius:50%;position:relative;height:150px;width:150px;top:-178px;
opacity:0.3; margin:0 auto;z-index:-1;border:1px solid #da4521;background-color:#DA785A;
animation: pulsate 3s infinite;
-webkit-animation: pulsate 3s infinite;
}
Has anyone run into this issue before? If you're not seeing the issue with it, do you mind sharing what browser you're using?
EDIT: Added animation support for other browsers on fiddle. Removed ease-out
From what I can figure out, the flicker you're seeing is the opacity:0.5 being reset as the animation restarts, but before it moves the circle (appearing for one frame).
One possible solution to your problem (perhaps not the most elegant) is to add an extra keyframe and set height:0px to get the circle out of the way before the animation restarts.
CSS:
#keyframes pulsate {
0% {width:150px;height:150px;top:-178px;opacity:0.5;}
90% {width:900px;height:900px;top:-550px;opacity:0.0;border: 3px solid rgba(192, 61, 29, .9)}
99% {width:900px;height:900px;top:-550px;opacity:0.0;border: 3px solid rgba(192, 61, 29, .9)}
100% {width:900px;height:0px;top:-550px;opacity:0.0;border: 3px solid rgba(192, 61, 29, .9)}
}
FIDDLE - I also set the keyframes to opacity:0.0; so the circle fades out completely. Now you just need to play with opacity levels and keyframe % to get the lookt you wanted.
So, I understand how to perform both CSS3 transitions and animations. What is not clear, and I've googled, is when to use which.
For example, if I want to make a ball bounce, it is clear that animation is the way to go. I could provide keyframes and the browser would do the intermediates frames and I'll have a nice animation going.
However, there are cases when a said effect can be achieved either way. A simple and common example would be implement the facebook style sliding drawer menu:
This effect can be achieved through transitions like so:
.sf-page {
-webkit-transition: -webkit-transform .2s ease-out;
}
.sf-page.out {
-webkit-transform: translateX(240px);
}
http://jsfiddle.net/NwEGz/
Or, through animations like so:
.sf-page {
-webkit-animation-duration: .4s;
-webkit-transition-timing-function: ease-out;
}
.sf-page.in {
-webkit-animation-name: sf-slidein;
-webkit-transform: translate3d(0, 0, 0);
}
.sf-page.out {
-webkit-animation-name: sf-slideout;
-webkit-transform: translateX(240px);
}
#-webkit-keyframes sf-slideout {
from { -webkit-transform: translate3d(0, 0, 0); }
to { -webkit-transform: translate3d(240px, 0, 0); }
}
#-webkit-keyframes sf-slidein {
from { -webkit-transform: translate3d(240px, 0, 0); }
to { -webkit-transform: translate3d(0, 0, 0); }
}
http://jsfiddle.net/4Z5Mr/
With HTML that looks like so:
<div class="sf-container">
<div class="sf-page in" id="content-container">
<button type="button">Click Me</button>
</div>
<div class="sf-drawer">
</div>
</div>
And, this accompanying jQuery script:
$("#content-container").click(function(){
$("#content-container").toggleClass("out");
// below is only required for css animation route
$("#content-container").toggleClass("in");
});
What I'd like to understand is what are the pros and cons of these approaches.
One obvious difference is that animating is taking a whole lot more code.
Animation gives better flexibility. I can have different animation for sliding out and in
Is there something that can be said about performance. Do both take advantage of h/w acceleration?
Which is more modern and the way going forward
Anything else you could add?
It looks like you've got a handle on how to do them, just not when to do them.
A transition is an animation, just one that is performed between two distinct states - i.e. a start state and an end state. Like a drawer menu, the start state could be open and the end state could be closed, or vice versa.
If you want to perform something that does not specifically involve a start state and an end state, or you need more fine-grained control over the keyframes in a transition, then you've got to use an animation.
I'll let the definitions speak for themselves (according to Merriam-Webster):
Transition: A movement, development, or evolution from one form, stage, or style to another
Animation: Endowed with life or the qualities of life; full of movement
The names appropriately fit their purposes in CSS
So, the example you gave should use transitions because it is only a change from one state to another
A shorter answer, straight on point:
Transition:
Needs a triggering element (:hover, :focus etc.)
Only 2 animation states (start and end)
Used for simpler animations (buttons, dropdown menus and so on)
Easier to create but not so many animation/effect possibilities
Animation #keyframes:
It can be used for endless animations
Can set more than 2 states
No boundaries
Both use CPU acceleration for a much smoother effect.
Animation takes a lot more code unless you're using the same transition over and over, in which case an animation would be better.
You can have different effects for sliding in and out without an animation. Just have a different transition on both the original rule and the modified rule:
.two-transitions {
transition: all 50ms linear;
}
.two-transitions:hover {
transition: all 800ms ease-out;
}
Animations are just abstractions of transitions, so if the transition is hardware accelerated, the animation will be. It makes no difference.
Both are very modern.
My rule of thumb is if I use the same transition three times, it should probably be an animation. This is easier to maintain and alter in the future. But if you are only using it once, it is more typing to make the animation and maybe not worth it.
Animations are just that - a smooth behavior of set of properties. In other words it specifies what should happen to a set of element's properties. You define an animation and describe how this set of properties should behave during the animation process.
Transitions on the other side specify how a property (or properties) should perform their change. Each change. Setting a new value for certain property, be it with JavaScript or CSS, is always a transition, but by default it is not smooth. By setting transition in the css style you define different (smooth) way to perform these changes.
It can be said that transitions define a default animation that should be performed every time the specified property has changed.
Is there something that can be said about performance. Do both take
advantage of h/w acceleration?
In modern browsers, h/w acceleration occurs for the properties filter, opacity and transform. This is for both CSS Animations and CSS Transitions.
.yourClass {
transition: all 0.5s;
color: #00f;
margin: 50px;
font-size: 20px;
cursor: pointer;
}
.yourClass:hover {
color: #f00;
}
<p class="yourClass"> Hover me </p>
CSS3 Transitions brought frontend developers a significant ability to modify the appearance and behavior of an element as relative to a change in his state. CSS3 animations extends this ability and allow to modify the appearance and behavior of an element in multiple keyframes, so transitions provides us the ability to change from one state to another, while that animations can set multiple points of transition within different keyframes.
So, let's look at this transition sample where applied a transition with 2 points, start point at left: 0 and an end point at left: 500px
.container {
background: gainsboro;
border-radius: 6px;
height: 300px;
position: relative;
}
.ball {
transition: left 2s linear;
background: green;
border-radius: 50%;
height: 50px;
position: absolute;
width: 50px;
left: 0px;
}
.container:hover .ball{
left: 500px;
}
<div class="container">
<figure class="ball"></figure>
</div>
The above can be also created via animation like so:
#keyframes slide {
0% {
left: 0;
}
100% {
left: 500px;
}
}
.container {
background: gainsboro;
border-radius: 6px;
height: 200px;
position: relative;
}
.ball {
background: green;
border-radius: 50%;
height: 50px;
position: absolute;
width: 50px;
}
.container:hover .ball {
animation: slide 2s linear;
}
<div class="container">
<figure class="ball"></figure>
</div>
And if we would like another in-between point, it would be possible to achieve only via animation, we can add another keyFrame to achieve this and this is the real power of animation over transition:
#keyframes slide {
0% {
left: 0;
}
50% {
left: 250px;
top: 100px;
}
100% {
left: 500px;
}
}
.container {
background: gainsboro;
border-radius: 6px;
height: 200px;
position: relative;
}
.ball {
background: green;
border-radius: 50%;
height: 50px;
position: absolute;
width: 50px;
}
.container:hover .ball {
animation: slide 2s linear;
}
<div class="container">
<figure class="ball"></figure>
</div>
transition can go reverse from middle of the way, but animation replay the keyframes from start to end.
const transContainer = document.querySelector(".trans");
transContainer.onclick = () => {
transContainer.classList.toggle("trans-active");
}
const animContainer = document.querySelector(".anim");
animContainer.onclick = () => {
if(animContainer.classList.contains("anim-open")){
animContainer.classList.remove("anim-open");
animContainer.classList.add("anim-close");
}else{
animContainer.classList.remove("anim-close");
animContainer.classList.add("anim-open");
}
}
*{
font: 16px sans-serif;
}
p{
width: 100%;
background-color: #ff0;
}
.sq{
width: 80px;
height: 80px;
margin: 10px;
background-color: #f00;
display: flex;
justify-content: center;
align-items: center;
}
.trans{
transition: width 3s;
}
.trans-active{
width: 200px;
}
.anim-close{
animation: closingAnimation 3s forwards;
}
.anim-open{
animation: openingAnimation 3s forwards;
}
#keyframes openingAnimation {
from{width: 80px}
to{width: 200px}
}
#keyframes closingAnimation {
from{width: 200px}
to{width: 80px}
}
<p>Try click them before reaching end of movement:</p>
<div class="sq trans">Transition</div>
<div class="sq anim">Animation</div>
in addition, if you want the javascript to listen for end of transition, you'll get one event for each property that you change.
for example transition: width 0.5s, height 0.5s. the transitionend event will trigger two times, one for width and one for height.
Just a summary, thanks to this post, there are 5 main differences between CSS transitions vs CSS animations:
1/ CSS transitions:
Animate an object from one state to another, implicitly by browser
Cannot loop
Need a trigger to run (:hover, :focus)
Simple, less code, limited powerful
Easy to work in JavaScript
2/ CSS animations:
Freely switch between multiple states, with various properties and time frame
Can loop
Don’t need any kind of external trigger
More complex, more code, more flexible
Hard to work in JavaScript due to syntax for manipulating keyframes
I believe CSS3 animation vs CSS3 transition will give you the answer you want.
Basically below are some takeaways :
If performance is a concern, then choose CSS3 transition.
If state is to be maintained after each transition, then choose CSS3 transition.
If the animation needs to be repeated, choose CSS3 animation. Because it supports animation-iteration-count.
If a complicated animation is desired. Then CSS3 animation is preferred.
Don't bother yourself which is better. My give away is that, if you can solve your problem with just one or two lines of code then just do it rather than writing bunch of codes that will result to similar behavior.
Anyway, transition is like a subset of animation. It simply means transition can solve certain problems while animation on the other hand can solve all problems.
Animation enables you to have control of each stage starting from 0% all the way to 100% which is something transition cannot really do.
Animation require you writing bunch of codes while transition uses one or two lines of code to perform the same result depending on what you are working on.
Coming from the point of JavaScript, it is best to use transition. Anything that involve just two phase i.e. start and finish use transition.
Summary, if it is stressful don't use it since both can produce similar result
I have a case where I need an element to appear for a second and then disappear, and I must not use javascript for it, so I'm trying to make it work with CSS.
Here's an example:
#-webkit-keyframes slide-one-pager {
0% { left: 0; }
50% { left: 100px; }
100% { left: 0; }
}
So in this example the property will gradually transition from 0 to 100 and back to 0. However, I need to get rid of that transition, so the property stays at 0 and gets to 100 as soon as it hits 50%. It doesn't work if I say left: 0; at 49%, because there is still a transition.
Another example, slightly more different than my original question, but if I find a solution for it it will do as well:
#-webkit-keyframes slide-one-pager {
0% { display: none; }
50% { display: block; }
75% { display: block; }
100% { display: none; }
}
Here I want to show an element for a period of time. No, using opacity is not an option, because the element is still there and is still clickable, and I need access to elements below. Unfortunately the "display" property doesn't seem to accept animating. If anyone can think of a solution how to show and hide an element with an animation (without transition!) I will be extremely grateful.
Any ideas?
You can use step-start or step-end (graphs) in your animation configuration so the curve will act like a "steps" (not curvy) so there will be no visual transition between frames, thus the animation will just "jump" between frames.
Example CSS:
animation:1s move infinite step-end;
The above example will call the move keyframes (which I didn't write because it's irrelevant), and will loop on the frames endlessly with the "step" argument which was described earlier, without a transitioned curve.
#keyframes foo{
0%{ margin-left:0 }
50%{ margin-left:50% }
}
div{
width: 50px;
height: 50px;
background: black;
border-radius: 50%;
animation:1s foo infinite;
}
input:checked + div{
animation-timing-function: step-end;
}
<label>
<input type='checkbox' checked /> Disable Animation transition
<div></div>
</label>
👉 Cool demo using this technique
I searched the same thing as you actually.
You can set a greatful parameters in animation, called animation-timing-function allowing you to set perfectly and mathematicaly the animation : With bezier curve values or, if, like me, you're not that good mathematician, a parameter call "step()".
For an example, in none shorthand writing :
.hiding {
animation-name:slide-one-pager;
animation-duration:2s;
animation-timing-function:steps(1);
}
By default, the value of this parameter is set to 0, meaning no steps.
You can read more about this interesting feature here : https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/timing-function
And here a shorthand notation for your animation:
.hiding {
animation:slide-one-pager 2s steps(1);
}
For me, it works fine at least on firefox 23.0.1.
Even if I think you solved the problem since one year, maybe could help some people like me here :)
I made it using the -webkit-animation-fill-mode: forwards; property, that stops the animation at 100% without returning the element to the original state. I made up a fiddle with a working example, you can check it out here.
Although in the fiddle you can find a better example, I basically did this (Assuming absolute positioned elements):
.hiding {
-webkit-animation: slide-one-pager 2s;
-webkit-animation-fill-mode: forwards;
}
#-webkit-keyframes slide-one-pager {
0% { left: 0; }
49% { left: 0; }
50% { left: -100px; }
100% { left: -100px; }
}
It just jumps from 0 to -100 in the middle of the transition (49% -> 50% as you 'suggested' :P), and stays there at 100%. As said, with -webkit-animation-fill-mode: forwards; the element will stay as in 100% without going back to it's original state.
I don't know if it'll work in your scenario, but I believe there'd be an easy solution if it doesn't.
You can use this:
animation: typing 1s cubic-bezier(1,-1, 0, 2) infinite;