background-position value manipulation - css

I have a project where I am building slides described inside of an XML file but it requires to allow image positioning of the slides based on offset values.
Now I have Y offsets down pat, only problem now is that I require the ability to offset something in the X by an amount but still keep the %'age value behavior.
So basically is there anyway to have background-position's x start at 50% and then offset it by a pixel amount and keep the relative behavior of the %'age( 50% + offsetInPixels)?

You can do this, but it isn't widely supported.
background-position: -moz-calc(50% - 20px) 0;
background-position: calc(50% - 20px) 0;
Currently (May 2011) this only works in Firefox 4 and IE9.
See http://caniuse.com/#calc for compatibility.

You can't do that with plain CSS (at this point in time, see Rich Bradshaw's answer).
You could accomplish that in javascript with something like:
var totalWidth = 960;
var xOffset = 10;
el.style.backgroundPosition = ((totalWidth/2) + xOffset) +"px 50px";

I'd say your best bet is sticking the background image as an image inside the containter... It's bit of a hack, but it works Also, consider (As Jesse said) adding overflow:hidden if you don't want the bg pouring out.
<div id="main" >
<div id="bg"><img src="http://www.google.com/images/logos/ps_logo2.png"/> </div </div>
#main {
width:400px;
height:300px;
background-color:blue;
position:relative;
}
#bg {
margin-left: 10px;
position:absolute;
width:100%;
height:100%;
margin-left:50%;
}
demonstrated: http://jsfiddle.net/mhy3r/10/

I found another solution using CSS3. However, it requires the container to have a fixed size.
HTML:
<div id="example">Example</div>
CSS:
#example {
width: 200px;
height: 200px;
padding-left: 100px;
background-origin: content-box;
background-position: 10px 10%;
}
It's a bit of a hack I guess. Rather than starting the background-position from the left top corner of the border-box, it uses the content-box instead which has 50% (i.e. 100px) padding. Like I said, you will need to know the exact value of 50% padding because writing padding-left: 50%; will be interpreted as 50% of the parent element.
If you need the full space inside this container you can put another <div> into it with margin-left: -100px;

Related

Button out of 3 graphic parts with fluid mid-part

I have an image:
with 3 parts:
, and
I want a button with a repeating part2, so the button text (centered) is variable.
But the button text should range 50% into the other pieces.
Part1 and part3 need a min width I think, unfortunately I have no useful example.
:before and :after didn't work very well (with position:absolute or similar), because the repeat part have to be fluid between the outer parts.
Any ideas? Greetz.
A modern posibility would be using border-image.
But if you want a wider support, do it with backgrounds.
The problem is that a repeating bkg is difficult to size . So, it's best to handle it in a pseudo element
.test {
min-width: 200px;
text-align: center;
line-height: 90px;
display: inline-block;
margin: 20px;
height: 100px;
padding: 0px 20px;
font-size: 30px;
color: white;
background-image: url('//i.stack.imgur.com/mYxcX.png'), url('//i.stack.imgur.com/TlpN0.png');
background-size: auto 100%;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
background-position: left top, right top;
position: relative;
}
.test:after {
content: "";
position: absolute;
background-image: url('//i.stack.imgur.com/GMhMi.png');
background-size: auto 100%;
left: 90px;
right: 100px;
top: 0px;
bottom: 0px;
z-index: -1;
}
<div class="test">TEST</div>
<div class="test">long test</div>
<div class="test">much longer test</div>
And the same, using border image. Using this image
we will get this: (note the trick about height:0px to allow for a single image in all the left and right sides.)
.test {
display: inline-block;
margin: 20px;
height: 0px;
font-size: 30px;
border-width: 50px;
border-image-source: url(http://i.stack.imgur.com/oXiA6.png);
border-image-slice: 50% 49% 50% 50% fill;
border-image-repeat: repeat repeat;
}
<div class="test">TEST</div>
<div class="test">long test</div>
<div class="test">much longer test</div>
UPDATED and totally Changed:
Thanks to #vals comment below which let me had the "idea bulb" above my head, hence the "unless.." part in the comment.
This new solution is much cleaner in CSS and HTML, less code, no need to worry about position:absolute, no need for extra mess, just simply uses "multiple backgrounds" (1) as well as calc()(2) function with min-width too techniques. but first here's the code and comments will explain:
JS Fiddle
.test-class {
/* so that div can expand to contain the text as well as the padding */
width:auto;
/* min width = 173px left image width + 199px right image width */
/* without this it'll collapse */
min-width:372px;
padding:0 20px 0 10px; /* just to give it breathign space on sides */
line-height: 148px;
color: white;
font-size:24px;
/* no color background because the images are PNGs with alpha */
background-color: transparent;
/* setting multiple images having the middle "extendable" one as third background */
background-image: url('//i.stack.imgur.com/mYxcX.png'),
url('//i.stack.imgur.com/TlpN0.png'),
url('//i.stack.imgur.com/GMhMi.png');
/* set no repeat to all, even the extendable otherwise it'll appear behind the
other two images, instead we don't repeat it but control its size later */
background-repeat: no-repeat, no-repeat, no-repeat;
/* position each image to its corresponding position, the 46.5% for the middle
image is because the left-side image has less width than the one on the right */
background-position:left center, right center, 46.5% 50%;
/* finally giving the images on the sides their exact-pixel size, while for the
one on the middle we make use of calc() function, so the width size of the middle
image = full div size (100%) - the width values of the left and right image (173+199) */
background-size: 173px 148px, 199px 148px, calc(100% - 372px) 148px;
display: inline-block;
text-align:center;
}
<div class="test-class">Home</div>
<div class="test-class" style="margin-left:200px;">about company</div>
<div class="test-class">example dummy text for demo only</div>
Alternatively, as I commented, you can use the CSS Sliding Door technique which was so practical and used a lot before CSS border-radius and CSS shadow presented and simplified interfaces. another example perfect CSS sprite sliding doors button
This JS Fiddle 2 shows how to implement the sliding door method for achieving such task, while it looks kind too much wide for this images set, since the right side image has 199px width, it could be used for images with less width values.
And this JS Fiddle 3 is similar to sliding door but with :before and :after but with one issue that it has to have display:block which make it not workign for horizontal alignment but could be fixed with javascript after settign it's display to inline-block.
Also there's another way, using SVG as background image which is better first because it is scale-able especially for non linear images like the blue ink circle used in the great example by #vals .
Second benefit of using SVG is using inline SVG and because SVG is made of groups and element could be targeted with CSS just like targeting other DOM elements.
https://css-tricks.com/using-svg/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1). Resources:
caniuse - Multiple backgrounds
MDN - Using CSS multiple backgrounds
(2). Resources:
caniuse CSS calc()
MDN - calc()
CSS-Tricks - A couple of use cases for calc

Responsive triangle div

I'm trying to create a responsive triangle div which will sit at the top of the page as a header.
I was able to achieve that with the following code:
div{
width: 0;
height: 0;
border-style: solid;
border-width: 200px 400px 0 0;
border-color: #007bff transparent transparent transparent;
}
<div></div>
The problem is that I want this triangle to be responsive to the width of the page and change proportionally in height as well.
I tried setting width and height to percent based, however that produced a really small triangle which you can see here:
http://jsfiddle.net/Ltbzkq0e/1/
How to make the borders work with percent without having to use webkits? Is that possible, if not how do I achieve this effect with webkits?
EDIT:
I would also like to fit content in this div. At the moment the only way I can think of is to use absolute positioning and set height to -20px, etc... Is there a better way of accomplishing this?
You can use transform-rotate and a pseudo element to create a responsive triangle. This technique is detailed here : CSS triangles with transform rotate.
For your specific case it could look like this :
DEMO
.tr{
padding-bottom:30%;
position:relative;
overflow:hidden;
}
.tr:before{
content:'';
position:absolute;
top:0; left:0;
width:120%; height:100%;
background-color : #0079C6;
-webkit-transform-origin:0 100%;
-ms-transform-origin:0 100%;
transform-origin:0 100%;
-webkit-transform: rotate(-17deg);
-ms-transform: rotate(-17deg);
transform: rotate(-17deg);
}
.content{
position:absolute;
}
<div class="tr">
<div class="content"> ... CONTENT HERE ...</div>
</div>
If you need IE8 support, you will need to use a JS fallback. This answer describes a way to achieve it.
if you don't care about IE8 and recent Android support — and since you need to have border-width proportional to the page size — you can use viewport-based (vw and vh) units
e.g.
border-width: 100vw 100vh 0 0;
example fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/swbfqemr/

background-image doesn't appear if <div> is empty?

I created a <div> first thing in the <body> to draw a top line at the top of the page:
<body>
<div class="bordertop"></div>
.....
</body>
and the style:
body {
font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;
-webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;
margin:0;
}
.bordertop {
background-image: url(../images/top_border.png);
background-repeat: repeat-x;
}
However, the top_border image doesn't appear unless I write some text inside the <div> but I don't want to. How could I fix this?
Since the div is empty, there's no content to push it "open" leaving the div to be 0px tall. Set explicit dimensions on the div and you should see the background image.
.bordertop
{
background-image: url(../images/top_border.png);
background-repeat: repeat-x;
height: 100px;
width: 100%; /* may not be necessary */
}
You might need to set the css width and height of your <div> element to whatever size you want
.bordertop {
background-image: url(../images/top_border.png);
background-repeat: repeat-x;
width: 200px;
height: 100px;
}
Give the div a height:1px. That should work. Otherwise your div is 0px high, meaning you won't see anything.
You could also give it padding-top:1px
Another thing you could do is to set the background-image of the line on the body in your CSS. This is assuming the line is the entire width of the body.
See demo
As the answers above me suggest ^^' it's because it has virtually no size, you need either to put content inside to resize it or to set width/height or padding in css bordertop class, or you can put another empty inside it with set size. I was going to skip this answer since there are already answers but I just wanted to add that width/height is not your only option.
On a side note, oh man, people here posting so fast I sometimes wonder if its a race and what is the prize, there must be some, I guess helping other is itself great prize. :) When I was starting to type this there was no answer yet.
The best way I have found is:
for landscape:
width:100%;
height:0;
padding-top:[ratio]%;
for portrait:
width:[ratio]%;
height:0;
padding-top:100%;
You need to determine which side is longer and accept this dimension as 100%
then calculate [ratio] - percentage of shorter dimension in relation to 100% longer dimension. Then use the one of solutions above.
I had the same problem for quite some time, my solution was giving the style lines of: min-height. This opens the div to the height given if there is no elements inside. The height can get bigger with the more elements inside, but not smaller.
Example code:
.fixed-bg {
/* The background image */
background-image: url("img_tree.gif");
/* Set a specified height, or the minimum height for the background image */
min-height: 500px;
/* Set background image to fixed (don't scroll along with the page) */
background-attachment: fixed;
/* Center the background image */
background-position: center;
/* Set the background image to no repeat */
background-repeat: no-repeat;
/* Scale the background image to be as large as possible */
background-size: cover;
}
code gotten from https://www.w3schools.com/cssref/pr_background-attachment.asp
If it is the only div element in the body use the following style to to make it occupy the full-width.
.bordertop {
position: absolute;
top: 0;
right: 0;
bottom: 0;
left: 0;
background-image:
url('../images/top_border.png');
}
I couldn't get my background showing in the div even with the width set up. Turns out i had to put "../" in the url section then it showed the picture i was struggling for quite a while.
left {
width: 800px;
height: auto;
min-height: 100%;
position: relative;
background-image: url("../img/loginpic.jpg");
background-size: cover;
border-top-left-radius: 4px;
border-bottom-left-radius: 4px;
background-color: crimson;
}
Otherwise, you can just open a <p></p> and in styles, remove the default margin length, that's margin: 0; and add height: 0.1px which doesn't consume much space, so it'll work.
Note: it'll work properly until it's not zoomed out more than 50%, so make sure of the use case before you apply it to the body.

How to get div height to auto-adjust to background size?

How do I get a div to automatically adjust to the size of the background I set for it without setting a specific height (or min-height) for it?
There is a very nice and cool way to make a background image work like an img element so it adjust its height automatically. You need to know the image width and height ratio. Set the height of the container to 0 and set the padding-top as percentage based upon the image ratio.
It will look like the following:
div {
background-image: url('http://www.pets4homes.co.uk/images/articles/1111/large/feline-influenza-all-about-cat-flu-5239fffd61ddf.jpg');
background-size: contain;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 100%;
height: 0;
padding-top: 66.64%; /* (img-height / img-width * container-width) */
/* (853 / 1280 * 100) */
}
You just got a background image with auto height which will work just like an img element. Here is a working prototype (you can resize and check the div height): http://jsfiddle.net/8m9ur5qj/
Another, perhaps inefficient, solution would be to include the image under an img element set to visibility: hidden;. Then make the background-image of the surrounding div the same as the image.
This will set the surrounding div to the size of the image in the img element but display it as a background.
<div style="background-image: url(http://your-image.jpg);">
<img src="http://your-image.jpg" style="visibility: hidden;" />
</div>
There is no way to auto adjust for background image size using CSS.
You can hack around it by measuring the background image on the server and then applying those attributes to the div, as others have mentioned.
You could also hack up some javascript to resize the div based on the image size (once the image has been downloaded) - this is basically the same thing.
If you need your div to auto-fit the image, I might ask why don't you just put an <img> tag inside your div?
This answer is similar to others, but is overall the best for most applications. You need to know the image size before hand which you usually do. This will let you add overlay text, titles etc. with no negative padding or absolute positioning of the image. They key is to set the padding % to match the image aspect ratio as seen in the example below. I used this answer and essentially just added an image background.
.wrapper {
width: 100%;
/* whatever width you want */
display: inline-block;
position: relative;
background-size: contain;
background: url('https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/67/Wiki-llama.jpg/1600px-Wiki-llama.jpg') top center no-repeat;
margin: 0 auto;
}
.wrapper:after {
padding-top: 75%;
/* this llama image is 800x600 so set the padding top % to match 600/800 = .75 */
display: block;
content: '';
}
.main {
position: absolute;
top: 0;
bottom: 0;
right: 0;
left: 0;
color: black;
text-align: center;
margin-top: 5%;
}
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="main">
This is where your overlay content goes, titles, text, buttons, etc.
</div>
</div>
I looked at some of the solutions and they're great but I think I found a surprisingly easy way.
First, we need to get the ratio from the background image. We simply divide one dimension through another. Then we get something like for example 66.4%
When we have image ratio we can simply calculate the height of the div by multiplying the ratio by viewport width:
height: calc(0.664 * 100vw);
To me, it works, sets div height properly and changes it when the window is resized.
Maybe this can help, it's not exactly a background, but you get the idea:
<style>
div {
float: left;
position: relative;
}
div img {
position: relative;
}
div div {
position: absolute;
top:0;
left:0;
}
</style>
<div>
<img src="http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0903/omegacen_davis.jpg" />
<div>Hi there</div>
</div>
Pretty sure this will never been seen all the way down here. But if your problem was the same as mine, this was my solution:
.imaged-container{
background-image:url('<%= asset_path("landing-page.png") %> ');
background-repeat: no-repeat;
background-size: 100%;
height: 65vw;
}
I wanted to have a div in the center of the image, and this will allow me of that.
There is a pure CSS solution that the other answers have missed.
The "content:" property is mostly used to insert text content into an element, but can also be used to insert image content.
.my-div:before {
content: url("image.png");
}
This will cause the div to resize its height to the actual pixel size of the image. To resize the width too, add:
.my-div {
display: inline-block;
}
The recently introduced CSS aspect-ratio attribute (~2020-2021) is a great way to do this without padding hacks and is supported on all evergreen browsers.
Since we need to know the aspect ratio of the image ahead of time, and in many usecases you'll be able to predetermine the image dimension ratio ahead of time (but not always for user generated content), you can either hardcode a single style or inline the css when necessary.
aspect-ratio will calculate the height when the width is specified, based on the provided ratio (or calculate width, if the height is specified).
div {
aspect-ratio: 3 / 2; /*common ratio, like an 800*600px image */
width: 200px; /* computed height will be 133.33px, which is width/aspect-ratio */
background: red; /* so any image bleed is shown*/
background-image: url('https://images.unsplash.com/photo-1631163190830-8770a0ad4aa9?ixid=MnwxMjA3fDB8MHxwaG90by1wYWdlfHx8fGVufDB8fHx8&ixlib=rb-1.2.1&auto=format&fit=crop&w=200&q=80');
}
<div></div>
You can do it server side: by measuring the image and then setting the div size, OR loading the image with JS, read it's attributes and then set the DIV size.
And here is an idea, put the same image inside the div as an IMG tag, but give it visibility: hidden + play with position relative+ give this div the image as background.
I had this issue and found Hasanavi's answer but I got a little bug when displaying the background image on a wide screen - The background image didn't spread to the whole width of the screen.
So here is my solution - based on Hasanavi's code but better... and this should work on both extra-wide and mobile screens.
/*WIDE SCREEN SUPPORT*/
#media screen and (min-width: 769px) {
div {
background-image: url('http://www.pets4homes.co.uk/images/articles/1111/large/feline-influenza-all-about-cat-flu-5239fffd61ddf.jpg');
background-size: cover;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 100%;
height: 0;
padding-top: 66.64%; /* (img-height / img-width * container-width) */
/* (853 / 1280 * 100) */
}
}
/*MOBILE SUPPORT*/
#media screen and (max-width: 768px) {
div {
background-image: url('http://www.pets4homes.co.uk/images/articles/1111/large/feline-influenza-all-about-cat-flu-5239fffd61ddf.jpg');
background-size: contain;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 100%;
height: 0;
padding-top: 66.64%; /* (img-height / img-width * container-width) */
/* (853 / 1280 * 100) */
}
}
As you might have noticed, the background-size: contain; property doas not fit well in extra wide screens, and the background-size: cover; property does not fit well on mobile screens so I used this #media attribute to play around with the screen sizes and fix this issue.
This Worked For Me:
background-image: url("/assets/image_complete_path");
background-position: center; /* Center the image */
background-repeat: no-repeat; /* Do not repeat the image */
background-size: cover;
height: 100%;
If it is a single predetermined background image and you want the div to to be responsive without distorting the aspect ratio of the background image you can first calculate the aspect ratio of the image and then create a div which preserves it's aspect ratio by doing the following:
Say you want an aspect ratio of 4/1 and the width of the div is 32%:
div {
width: 32%;
padding-bottom: 8%;
}
This results from the fact that padding is calculated based on the width of the containing element.
Adding to the original accepted answer just add style width:100%; to the inner image so it will auto-shrink/expand for mobile devices and wont end up taking large top or bottom margins in mobile view.
<div style="background-image: url(http://your-image.jpg);background-position:center;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-size: contain;height: auto;">
<img src="http://your-image.jpg" style="visibility: hidden; width: 100%;" />
</div>
How about this :)
.fixed-centered-covers-entire-page{
margin:auto;
background-image: url('https://i.imgur.com/Ljd0YBi.jpg');
background-repeat: no-repeat;background-size:cover;
background-position: 50%;
background-color: #fff;
left:0;
right:0;
top:0;
bottom:0;
z-index:-1;
position:fixed;
}
<div class="fixed-centered-covers-entire-page"></div>
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/josephmcasey/KhPaF/
I would do the reverse and place the image inside of the main div with a width of 100%, which will make both the div and image responsive to screen size,
Then add the content within an absolute positioned div with width and height of 100% inside of the main div.
<div class="main" style="position: relative; width: 100%;">
<img src="your_image.png" style="width: 100%;">
<div style="position: absolute; width: 100%; height: 100%; display: flex...">
YOUR CONTENT
</div>
</div>
May be this can help, it's not exactly a background, but you get the simple idea
<style>
div {
float: left;
position: relative;
}
div img {
position: relative;
}
div div {
position: absolute;
top:0;
left:0;
}
</style>
<div>
<img src="http://www.planwallpaper.com/static/images/recycled_texture_background_by_sandeep_m-d6aeau9_PZ9chud.jpg" />
<div>Hello</div>
</div>
You can do something like that
<div style="background-image: url(http://your-image.jpg); position:relative;">
<img src="http://your-image.jpg" style="opacity: 0;" />
<div style="position: absolute;top: 0;width: 100%;height: 100%;">my content goes here</div>
</div>
If you know the ratio of the image at build time, want the height based off of the window height and you're ok targeting modern browsers (IE9+), then you can use viewport units for this:
.width-ratio-of-height {
overflow-x: scroll;
height: 100vh;
width: 500vh; /* width here is 5x height */
background-image: url("http://placehold.it/5000x1000");
background-size: cover;
}
Not quite what the OP was asking, but probably a good fit for a lot of those viewing this question, so wanted to give another option here.
Fiddle: https://jsfiddle.net/6Lkzdnge/
Suppose you have some thing like this:
<div class="content">
... // inner HTML
</div>
and you want add a background to it, but you do not know the dimension of the image.
I had a similar problem, and I solved it by using grid:
HTML
<div class="outer">
<div class="content">
... // inner HTML
</div>
<img class="background" />
</div>
CSS
.outer{
display: grid;
grid-template: auto / auto;
// or you can assign a name for this block
}
.content{
grid-area: 1 / 1 / 2 / 2;
z-index: 2;
}
.background{
grid-area: 1 / 1 / 2 / 2;
z-index: 1;
}
z-index is just for placing image actually at the background, you can of course place img.background above the div.content.
NOTE: it might cause the div.content has same height of the picture, so if div.content have any children that placed according to its height, you might want set a number not something like 'auto'.
inspired by the most liked answer, I ended up coming up with a solution using min-height and 'vw' unit
I had an image in a very unusual proportion
through experimentation I ended up using
min-height: 36vw;
that value must change, according to the ratio of your image
css code used im my actual page:
background:url('your-background-image-adress') center center no-repeat;
background-size: 100%;
background-position: top center;
margin-top: 50px;
width: 100%;
min-height: 36vw;
code pen example https://codepen.io/viniciusrad/pen/GRNPXoL
Had this issue with the Umbraco CMS and in this scenario you can add the image to the div using something like this for the 'style' attribute of the div:
style="background: url('#(image.mediaItem.Image.umbracoFile)') no-repeat scroll 0 0 transparent; height: #(image.mediaItem.Image.umbracoHeight)px"
I have been dealing with this issue for a while and decided to write a jquery plugin to solve this problem.
This plugin will find all the elements with class "show-bg" (or you can pass it your own selector) and calculate their background image dimensions.
all you have to do is include this code, mark the desired elements with class="show
Enjoy!
https://bitbucket.org/tomeralmog/jquery.heightfrombg
The best solution i can think of is by specifying your width and height in percent . This will allow you to rezise your screen based on your monitor size. its more of responsive layout..
For an instance.
you have
<br/>
<div> . //This you set the width percent to %100
<div> //This you set the width percent to any amount . if you put it by 50% , it will be half
</div>
</div>
This is the best option if you would want a responsive layout, i wouldnt recommend float , in certain cases float is okay to use. but in most cases , we avoid using float as it will affect a quite of number of things when you are doing cross-browser testing.
Hope this helps :)
actually it's quite easy when you know how to do it:
<section data-speed='.618' data-type='background' style='background: url(someUrl)
top center no-repeat fixed; width: 100%; height: 40vw;'>
<div style='width: 100%; height: 40vw;'>
</div>
</section>
the trick is just to set the enclosed div just as a normal div with dimensional values same as the background dimensional values (in this example, 100% and 40vw).
I solved this using jQuery. Until new CSS rules allow for this type of behavior natively I find it is the best way to do it.
Setup your divs
Below you have your div that you want the background to appear on ("hero") and then the inner content/text you want to overlay on top of your background image ("inner"). You can (and should) move the inline styles to your hero class. I left them here so it's quick and easy to see what styles are applied to it.
<div class="hero" style="background-image: url('your-image.png'); background-size: 100%; background-repeat: no-repeat; width: 100%;">
<div class="inner">overlay content</div>
</div>
Calculate image aspect ratio
Next calculate your aspect ratio for your image by dividing the height of your image by the width. For example, if your image height is 660 and your width is 1280 your aspect ratio is 0.5156.
Setup a jQuery window resize event to adjust height
Finally, add a jQuery event listener for window resize and then calculate your hero div's height based off of the aspect ratio and update it. This solution typically leaves an extra pixel at the bottom due to imperfect calculations using the aspect ratio so we add a -1 to the resulting size.
$(window).on("resize", function ()
{
var aspect_ratio = .5156; /* or whatever yours is */
var new_hero_height = ($(window).width()*aspect_ratio) - 1;
$(".hero").height(new_hero_height);
}
Ensure it works on page load
You should perform the resize call above when the page loads to have the image sizes calculated at the outset. If you don't, then the hero div won't adjust until you resize the window. I setup a separate function to do the resize adjustments. Here's the full code I use.
function updateHeroDiv()
{
var aspect_ratio = .5156; /* or whatever yours is */
var new_hero_height = ($(window).width()*aspect_ratio) - 1;
$(".hero").height(new_hero_height);
}
$(document).ready(function()
{
// calls the function on page load
updateHeroDiv();
// calls the function on window resize
$(window).on("resize", function ()
{
updateHeroDiv();
}
});
If you can make an image on Photoshop where the main layer has an opacity of 1 or so and is basically transparent, put that img in the div and then make the real picture the background image. THEN set the opacity of the img to 1 and add the size dimensions you want.
That picture is done that way, and you can't even drag the invisible image off the page which is cool.
just add to div
style="overflow:hidden;"

CSS 100% height with padding/margin

With HTML/CSS, how can I make an element that has a width and/or height that is 100% of it's parent element and still has proper padding or margins?
By "proper" I mean that if my parent element is 200px tall and I specify height = 100% with padding = 5px I would expect that I should get a 190px high element with border = 5px on all sides, nicely centered in the parent element.
Now, I know that that's not how the standard box model specifies it should work (although I'd like to know why, exactly...), so the obvious answer doesn't work:
#myDiv {
width: 100%
height: 100%;
padding: 5px;
}
But it would seem to me that there must be SOME way of reliably producing this effect for a parent of arbitrary size. Does anyone know of a way of accomplishing this (seemingly simple) task?
Oh, and for the record I'm not terribly interested in IE compatibility so that should (hopefully) make things a bit easier.
EDIT: Since an example was asked for, here's the simplest one I can think of:
<html style="height: 100%">
<body style="height: 100%">
<div style="background-color: black; height: 100%; padding: 25px"></div>
</body>
</html>
The challenge is then to get the black box to show up with a 25 pixel padding on all edges without the page growing big enough to require scrollbars.
I learned how to do these sort of things reading "PRO HTML and CSS Design Patterns". The display:block is the default display value for the div, but I like to make it explicit. The container has to be the right type; position attribute is fixed, relative, or absolute.
.stretchedToMargin {
display: block;
position:absolute;
height:auto;
bottom:0;
top:0;
left:0;
right:0;
margin-top:20px;
margin-bottom:20px;
margin-right:80px;
margin-left:80px;
background-color: green;
}
<div class="stretchedToMargin">
Hello, world
</div>
Fiddle by Nooshu's comment
There is a new property in CSS3 that you can use to change the way the box model calculates width/height, it's called box-sizing.
By setting this property with the value "border-box" it makes whichever element you apply it to not stretch when you add a padding or border. If you define something with 100px width, and 10px padding, it will still be 100px wide.
box-sizing: border-box;
See here for browser support. It does not work for IE7 and lower, however, I believe that Dean Edward's IE7.js adds support for it. Enjoy :)
The solution is to NOT use height and width at all! Attach the inner box using top, left, right, bottom and then add margin.
.box {margin:8px; position:absolute; top:0; left:0; right:0; bottom:0}
<div class="box" style="background:black">
<div class="box" style="background:green">
<div class="box" style="background:lightblue">
This will show three nested boxes. Try resizing browser to see they remain nested properly.
</div>
</div>
</div>
The better way is with the calc() property. So, your case would look like:
#myDiv {
width: calc(100% - 10px);
height: calc(100% - 10px);
padding: 5px;
}
Simple, clean, no workarounds. Just make sure you don't forget the space between the values and the operator (eg (100%-5px) that will break the syntax. Enjoy!
According the w3c spec height refers to the height of the viewable area e.g. on a 1280x1024 pixel resolution monitor 100% height = 1024 pixels.
min-height refers to the total height of the page including content so on a page where the content is bigger than 1024px min-height:100% will stretch to include all of the content.
The other problem then is that padding and border are added to the height and width in most modern browsers except ie6(ie6 is actually quite logical but does not conform to the spec). This is called the box model. So if you specify
min-height: 100%;
padding: 5px;
It will actually give you 100% + 5px + 5px for the height. To get around this you need a wrapper container.
<style>
.FullHeight {
height: auto !important; /* ie 6 will ignore this */
height: 100%; /* ie 6 will use this instead of min-height */
min-height: 100%; /* ie 6 will ignore this */
}
.Padded {
padding: 5px;
}
</style>
<div class="FullHeight">
<div class="Padded">
Hello i am padded.
</div
</div>
1. Full height with padding
body {
margin: 0;
}
.container {
min-height: 100vh;
padding: 50px;
box-sizing: border-box;
background: silver;
}
<div class="container">Hello world.</div>
2. Full height with margin
body {
margin: 0;
}
.container {
min-height: calc(100vh - 100px);
margin: 50px;
background: silver;
}
<div class="container">Hello world.</div>
3. Full height with border
body {
margin: 0;
}
.container {
min-height: 100vh;
border: 50px solid pink;
box-sizing: border-box;
background: silver;
}
<div class="container">Hello world.</div>
This is one of the outright idiocies of CSS - I have yet to understand the reasoning (if someone knows, pls. explain).
100% means 100% of the container height - to which any margins, borders and padding are added. So it is effectively impossible to get a container which fills it's parent and which has a margin, border, or padding.
Note also, setting height is notoriously inconsistent between browsers, too.
Another thing I've learned since I posted this is that the percentage is relative the container's length, that is, it's width, making a percentage even more worthless for height.
Nowadays, the vh and vw viewport units are more useful, but still not especially useful for anything other than the top-level containers.
Another solution is to use display:table which has a different box model behaviour.
You can set a height and width to the parent and add padding without expanding it. The child has 100% height and width minus the paddings.
JSBIN
Another option would be to use box-sizing propperty. Only problem with both would be they dont work in IE7.
Another solution: You can use percentage units for margins as well as sizes. For example:
.fullWidthPlusMargin {
width: 98%;
margin: 1%;
}
The main issue here is that the margins will increase/decrease slightly with the size of the parent element. Presumably the functionality you would prefer is for the margins to stay constant and the child element to grow/shrink to fill changes in spacing. So, depending on how tight you need your display to be, that could be problematic. (I'd also go for a smaller margin, like 0.3%).
A solution with flexbox (working on IE11): (or view on jsfiddle)
<html>
<style>
html, body {
height: 100%; /* fix for IE11, not needed for chrome/ff */
margin: 0; /* CSS-reset for chrome */
}
</style>
<body style="display: flex;">
<div style="background-color: black; flex: 1; margin: 25px;"></div>
</body>
</html>
(The CSS-reset is not necessarily important for the actual problem.)
The important part is flex: 1 (In combination with display: flex at the parent). Funnily enough, the most plausible explanation I know for how the Flex property works comes from a react-native documentation, so I refer to it anyway:
(...) flex: 1, which tells a component to fill all available space, shared evenly amongst other components with the same parent
To add -webkit and -moz would be more appropriate
-webkit-box-sizing: border-box;
-moz-box-sizing: border-box;
box-sizing: border-box;
Frank's example confused me a bit - it didn't work in my case because I didn't understand positioning well enough yet. It's important to note that the parent container element needs to have a non-static position (he mentioned this but I overlooked it, and it wasn't in his example).
Here's an example where the child - given padding and a border - uses absolute positioning to fill the parent 100%. The parent uses relative positioning in order to provide a point of reference for the child's position while remaining in the normal flow - the next element "more-content" is not affected:
#box {
position: relative;
height: 300px;
width: 600px;
}
#box p {
position: absolute;
border-style: dashed;
padding: 1em;
top: 0;
right: 0;
bottom: 0;
left: 0;
}
<div id="box">
<p>100% height and width!</p>
</div>
<div id="more-content">
</div>
A useful link for quickly learning CSS positioning
This is the default behavior of display: block The fastest way that you can fix it in 2020 is to set display: 'flex' of parent element and padding e.g. 20px then all its children will have 100% height relative to its height.
Border around div, rather than page body margin
Another solution - I just wanted a simple border around the edge of my page, and I wanted 100% height when the content was smaller than that.
Border-box didn't work, and the fixed positioning seemed wrong for such a simple need.
I ended up adding a border to my container, instead of relying on the margin of the body of the page - it looks like this :
body, html {
height: 100%;
margin: 0;
}
.container {
width: 100%;
min-height: 100%;
border: 8px solid #564333;
}
<style type="text/css">
.stretchedToMargin {
position:absolute;
width:100%;
height:100%;
}
</style>

Resources