I am having an issue with Chrome (v. 67) at OSX and movement animations. I've prepared JS fiddle with it:
https://jsfiddle.net/5m173ghv/31/
If you open it at safari it is working very good. But, when you will use chrome it has little lags when moving.
I cannot describe it a bit more... You need to open it and try yourself on the big screen... Please look carefully at white box. You will see that this box has sometimes something like lags or small jumps(?)...
This is very weird. I've tried almost every answer from the internet (trust me ;) ).
I also tried:
Change transforms at animation into position (left)
Change animations into transitions
adding additional parameters (backface-visibility, perspective, will-change...)
Changing sequences of animation to have more steps (per 10%)
Debugging on chrome dev tools (~30-40fps)
Adding transforms like translateZ(0)
You think that this is chrome bug or maybe my fault? Do you have any solution for that?
Here you have code:
HTML
<span class="spark"></div>
SCSS
body {
background-color: black;
}
#keyframes left-to-right {
0% {
transform: translate3d(0,0,0);
}
100% {
transform: translate3d(50vw,0,0);
}
}
.spark {
position: absolute;
top: 30px;
width: 322px;
height: 500px;
background-color: white;
transform: translate3d(0,0,0);
backface-visibility: hidden;
perspective: 1000px;
animation: left-to-right 5s infinite linear;
will-change: transform;
pointer-events: none;
user-select: none;
}
#name
{
width: 100px;
height: 20px;
background-color: lightgrey;
}
<div id="name">
I am Batman I am BatmanI am Batman I am Batman
</div>
I don't know how to explain this but I have contents of name slide inside the div with infinite iterations.
This is what I tried but it doesn;t give affect.
-webkit-iteration: infinite;
You had the right idea and that was a great start. What you are looking for is #keyframes. With keyframes, you can create a function name and specify the start and end values with from and to respectively.
The animation property is a shorthand for declaring multiple animation properties in one line. It can take among other things
animation-name: In this case, move, that we defined in out keyframes function
animation-duration: How long the animation will take. In this case, it will take 2 seconds, to complete the transition
animation-iteration-count: How many times the function will be called. Here, it will continue indefinitely.
Also, keep in mind that it's animation-iteration-count instead of animation-iteration if you are not doing the shorthand.
Browser Support
Internet Explorer 10+ (Will not work in IE9 or lower)
Google Chrome: 43+
Firefox: 16+
Safari: 9+
Opera: 30+
Snippet
#name {
width: 100px;
height: 20px;
background-color: lightgrey;
animation: move 2s infinite;
}
#keyframes move {
from { margin-left: 0px; }
to { margin-left: 100px; }
}
<div id="name">
I am Batman I am BatmanI am Batman I am Batman
</div>
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'm looking to do a simple effect of crushing some text. Only problem is, when I scale along the Y axis, it squeezes from top and bottom, leaving a strange floating squeezed element.
#-webkit-keyframes crush_head {
from {
-webkit-transform:scaleY(1); /* Safari and Chrome */
}
to {
-webkit-transform:scaleY(0.5); /* Safari and Chrome */
}
}
I want to squeeze this puppy DOWN like it's getting a weight dropped on it's head. NOT just from both sides. Any idea how to achieve the desired effect?
Attached is a fiddle of how I'm currently doing this.
http://jsfiddle.net/54A9M/
The property that you are looking for is transform-origin-y:
-webkit-transform-origin-y: 77%;
.crush {
display: -moz-inline-stack;
display: inline-block;
zoom: 1;
*display: inline;
vertical-align: top;
border-top: 1px solid black;
-webkit-animation-fill-mode: forwards;
-webkit-animation-name: crush_head;
-webkit-animation-duration:3s;
-webkit-animation-timing-function:ease-in;
-webkit-animation-delay:2s;
-webkit-animation-iteration-count: 1;
-webkit-transform-origin-y: 77%;
}
updated demo
The usual value would be "bottom", but then it will crush to the lowest point under the letters (in fact, to the real bottom of the text).
I set it to 77% on a trial an error basis.
I came across this website today and I was mystified: http://www.actionbutton.net/
Is he using some kind of known technique for his backgrounds that scroll at a different rate and overlap each other. I looked at the source but am pretty confused. Does anyone know what the technique is called and how to learn it?
Here is an approximation of the parallax effect that doesn't use JS (thus backgrounds are scrolling at constant speed). The jfiddle example: http://jsfiddle.net/MFC9B/2/
Key is that there is a 2-layer nested divs, the outer one to hold the background, the inner one to hold the content:
.section {
position:relative;
z-index:1;
height:500px;
width:100%;
background-attachment:fixed; /* this keeps the background in place */
background-size:100% 100%;
background-repeat:no-repeat;
}
.content {
position:relative;
z-index:2;
background-color:#fff;
border:2px solid #666;
height:50%; /* this height difference allows the bg to show through */
}
It's call parallax there's plenty of plugin for this e.g. http://www.ianlunn.co.uk/plugins/jquery-parallax/
You could also consider something like that (no javascript is required):
#keyframes backgroundscroller {
from {
background-position: 0% 0%;
}
to {
background-position: 500% 500%, 400% 400%, 300% 300%, 200% 200%, 100% 100%;
}
}
#yourdivid {
background-image: url('full/sprite1.png'), url('512/sprite2.png'), url('256/sprite3.png'), url('128/sprite4.png'), url('64/sprite5.png');
animation-name: backgroundscroller;
animation-duration: 300s;
animation-timing-function: linear;
animation-iteration-count: infinite;
animation-direction: normal;
}
Obviously you must be aware that this will work only with browsers that support CSS3 and you also want to consider including a very useful javascript that takes care of adding prefixes where and if needed: http://leaverou.github.com/prefixfree/