some designs on the Apple's user's webpage show a photo that is tilted slightly, like at a 5 or 10 degree angle. while this is no big deal, it does make the webpage totally different from "all the rest".
is it true that currently using HTML or CSS, this can't be done yet?
like the big photo in the middle:
alt text http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/383/phototilt.png
(the program lets you choose photos and then create the page (html and jpg) dynamically for you)
CCS 3 will offer this possibility, but it's still not cross-browser and you cannot do it with traditional HTML + CSS... yet.
Websites having a tilted image do it by rotating it in, say, Photoshop and making its background transparent. That's the whole trick there's to it.
Tip: save that picture to your HD and see by yourself. That's probably just an squared image with transparent background, or maybe it has the current background cut nicely to fit there.
You can do it, but only in Firefox 3.5+ and Safari 3.2+ (and recent webkit based browsers). Both provide browser specific CSS extensions for skew: -moz-transform and -webkit-transform respectively.
Here's a nice example that builds a 3d looking cube out of divs: (from http://www.fofronline.com/2009-04/3d-cube-using-css-transformations/)
<div class="cube">
<div class="topFace">
<div>
Content
</div>
</div>
<div class="leftFace">
Content
</div>
<div class="rightFace">
Content
</div>
</div>
And CSS:
.cube {
position: relative;
top: 200px;
}
.rightFace,
.leftFace,
.topFace div {
padding: 10px;
width: 180px;
height: 180px;
}
.rightFace,
.leftFace,
.topFace {
position: absolute;
}
.leftFace {
-webkit-transform: skewY(30deg);
-moz-transform: skewY(30deg);
background-color: #ccc;
}
.rightFace {
-webkit-transform: skewY(-30deg);
-moz-transform: skewY(-30deg);
background-color: #ddd;
left: 200px;
}
Yes, with CSS3 you can:
-webkit-transform: rotate(20deg);
-moz-transform: rotate(20deg);
-ms-transform: rotate(20deg);
-o-transform: rotate(20deg);
transform: rotate(20deg);
Supported by all the modern browsers and IE9+.
See CSS transform on MDN for more information.
To my knowledge you can not do that. Are you sure the image you are thinking of isn't tilted in Photoshop or similar and just added to the page like that?
You can use Apple specific CSS attributes (soon to be ratified, and then they'll remove the webkit prefixes for them) to do this and animation effects, but it will only show up in Safari and Chrome right now. Still, they look quite pretty and CSS is simple to do.
Right now it's probably just done in Photoshop, and nicely anti-aliased there as well, so that it has a consistent cross-browser appearance.
We are doing something similar at work, we have to do it on the fly.
You can't do it with just html/css, however we are using an image library through a php script to generate them automatically, and then make the background transparent.
Use a PHP GD Library. Makes things so much easier.
No. You can't.
Tilting images and text is still JavaScript juju.
Edit: Or, at least, you couldn't with CSS2. Starting with CSS3, there's the transform property, which includes rotations.
Related
This is a bit of a long-winded question, but I hope someone can break this down for me. I have 2 questions:
Why a CSS property doesn't do what it should.
Why this particular CSS property works on an unsuspecting element, and why it doesn't work on the CSS :hover selector.
Created a flipcard animation. Got some graphics/trailing lines issues with transitions (in Chrome).
Doing some Googling, I found out that apparently, using -webkit-transform: translate3d(0,0,0); is supposed to fix the issue by using hardware acceleration.
However, I couldn't figure out where to place this CSS property. I tried placing it on the .flipcard-container, .flipcard, on the actual transition (.flipcard-container: hover .flipcard).
None of these removed the trailing lines caused by the animation.
Question 1: Where can I use the -webkit-transform: translate3d(0,0,0); properly in order to take advantage of the hardware acceleration, and why does/doesn't it work there?
But, after doing even more Googling and copying someone else's code, I found adding perspective: 600pxto the .flipcard-container somehow fixed the issue. And on top of that, it even makes my animation look really nice.
It shouldn't bother me so much, but it does that I cannot figure out why this worked.
According to the MDN docs:
The perspective CSS property determines the distance between the z=0
plane and the user in order to give a 3D-positioned element some
perspective.
Question 2: Why does this work in my transition so well? Shouldn't I have to place perspective in .flipcard-container: hover .flipcard instead of the .flip-container?
Of course, when placing it in the css :hover selector, the entire transition stops working. Does the perspective property also use hardware acceleration?
Here is the code, and thank you in advance.
.flipcard-container {
height: 400px;
width: 300px;
/* uncommenting the below property will fix the issue */
/* -webkit-perspective: 600; */
}
.flipcard-container:hover .flipcard {
transform: rotateY(180deg) scale(1.5);
}
.flipcard, .front, .back {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
.flipcard {
transform-style: preserve-3d;
transition: all .8s ease-in-out;
}
.front {
background: #6093e5;
position: relative;
backface-visibility: hidden;
}
.back {
background: #e56060;
position: absolute;
backface-visibility: hidden;
top: 0;
transform: rotateY(180deg);
}
<div class="flipcard-container">
<div class="flipcard">
<div class="front"></div>
<div class="back"></div>
</div>
</div>
Question 1
You are overriding the transform: tags with the hardware acceleration. This causes that the animation doesn't work if you put it in.
You can use this, to archive better (more stable fps)
.flipcard-container:hover .flipcard {
transform: rotateY(180deg) scale(1.5);
will-change: -webkit-transition;
will-change: transition;
}
it uses the new will-change property.
More details
The will-change CSS property provides a way for authors to hint
browsers about the kind of changes to be expected on an element, so
that the browser can setup appropriate optimizations ahead of time
before the element is actually changed. These kind of optimizations
can increase the responsiveness of a page by doing potentially
expensive work ahead of time before they are actually required.
Question 2
If you look at e.g. this:
https://codepen.io/jfcorugedo/pen/bBPWaO?q=3d+turn&limit=all&type=type-pens
you see that it also uses the perspective tag. It is used that you can see the rotation of the box (like in your case).
If you remove it, it looks like your code. It works only on the container because the object you want to flip is wrapped in it.
If you have more questions just ask :)
I am trying to create a isometric tile engine just using <div> tags.
I've seen numerous isometric tiling engines for HTML5 but they are either poorly documented nor what I expected them to be (i.e. most are asking me to download freeware to develop on).
I'm trying to replicate this image in CSS3:
When trying to transform: rotate(deg) a div in CSS, I noticed that this tile is not equilateral, so the div box surpassed the image:
Can anybody shed some light on this?
Hope this helps. I also have a JSFiddle.
div {
background: #dedede;
width: 50px;
height:50px;
margin: 20px;
transform: rotateX(60deg) rotateY(0deg) rotateZ(-45deg);
}
<div></div>
I'm new to using SVG sprites but after watching a tree house video on SVG sprites I'm giving it a go. I'm using the same formatting they did in the video for a link with a background image of an SVG pulled from the sprite, namely:
Where the styles are:
.helpmepls {
background: url("sprite.svg") no-repeat;
height: 32px;
width: 32px;
background-position: -32px -128px;
-webkit-transform: scale(2.0);
-ms-transform: scale(2.0);
-o-transform: scale(2.0);
transform: scale(2.0);
text-indent: 100%;
white-space: nowrap;
overflow: hidden;
}
However whenever scaling the images larger than 1.0 they become pixelated in Edge (and probably IE, haven't checked) even though they look good in Chrome. Help on how to make browser-compatible? Do I need to be using a container, an svg element, a view element, viewbox, or some combination of those?
Here is a Demo ! You can download it from Here.
My workflow
You could control the scaling by changing the value of scaleValue from line 1 in JS.
var scaleValue = 1.2;
I usually use "inline" SVG and the GreenSock library to make animations!
When i put transform: scale(1.1); on hover on some element the image became blurry. How to fix this bug?
Example
Try this, it's work fine for me!
img {
-webkit-backface-visibility: hidden;
-ms-transform: translateZ(0); /* IE 9 */
-webkit-transform: translateZ(0); /* Chrome, Safari, Opera */
transform: translateZ(0);
}
TL;DR
transform: scale is actually scaling the original image, and because you are leaving it to the browser's render engine to figure out what should go there you got a blurry image. try
img {
transform: scale(.9)
}
img:hover {
transform: scale(1)
}
Aaron Sibler answered the question for me.
I just experienced this riddle. In your example, you’ll
need to transform img DOWN something like “transform: scale(0.7)” and
then scale UP to the images native dimensions on hover like
“transform: scale(1.0)”
The scale value is relative to the original image’s dimensions – not
their current dimensions on screen so a scale of 1 always equals the
original image’s dimensions.
I’ve used this here;
http://meetaaronsilber.com/experiments/css3imgpop/index.html
I had this problem with SVG scaling and blurry images. I scaled up a background image to 4.5 and the image rendered very blurry while scaling up.
I read that you can scale down first transform: scale(0.7) and then scale up to transform: scale(1.0). In my case this meant a huge rebuild of my animation. I had a very complex animation with multiple scales and transforms etc.
I just left all as is and added a pseudo scale width. The browser then seems to re-render every frame, but since the width does not actually change you still can use
transform: scale(x.x) for scaling and you get a very sharp image.
Maybe someone can confirm this. Here is my code. In my case the image was 86px wide and it zoomed up to 4.5 times the initial value.
<div class="overall-scale">
<div class="image-scale"></div>
</div>
#keyframes overall-scale {
0% {
transform: scale(1);
}
100% {
transform: scale(4.5);
}
}
#keyframes image-scale {
0% {
width: 86px;
}
100% {
width: 86px;
}
}
Hope this helps and my explanation makes sense.
Please comment if this does not work for you.
I' ve read all the comments, and tryied all solutions people suggested. But nothing was really good except rotate(360deg). Everything, except this one made stuttering on images, or they became too blurry initially. But rotating is looking strange if you don't hide it. So I decided to rotate for 0.0000001deg and it worked! Image is blurry only during the transition, but at the end and at the start of it it is sharp. May be I just had too small pictures.
So, my current solution is adding this part to CSS (and nothing else):
img {
transform: rotate(0.00000000001deg);
}
Folks, I have text on a div that has transform: rotate(3deg). In Firefox, the text is rendered wavy. Removing the transform to the div fixes the waviness. Is there a way for me to have my cake and eat it too?
HTML:
<div class="card turn-right">
<div class="card-text">
<p>Blah. Blah. Blah.</p>
</div>
</div>
CSS:
.card {
display: block;
width: 550px;
height: 375px;
}
.turn-right {
-webkit-transform: rotate(3deg);
-moz-transform: rotate(3deg);
-ms-transform: rotate(3deg);
-o-transform: rotate(3deg);
transform: rotate(3deg);
}
Edit:
Additional information: I have to use a #font-face for this project.
Screenshot:
Try adding perspective
.turn-right {
-webkit-transform: perspective(9999px) rotate(3deg);
transform: perspective(9999px) rotate(3deg);
}
No need for -moz-transform in modern browsers
By the way, the same bug is present in webkit browsers.
Why does this work ?
I don't have a real answer, because I don't have the source for the browser. But my guess is the following. The browsers have a very good rendering engine, that can do lots of things, and does it pretty well. But doing all this is most of the time expensive (read: makes the browser slow). So, most of the time it is trying to guess: is this really necessary ? Do I really need to calculate the xxxx of the yyyy in the zzzz to display this ?
And some of the bugs come from that guess being incorrect, and omiting a necesary calculus.
The solution then, is to put there something that makes the browser rendering engine think "wait, I really need to calculate that, that is not the easy case".
Also in this line are fixes like translate3d(0,0,0) or translateZ(0) or backface-visibility hidden . What is the sense in translating something 0px ? They force the browser to do something the complicated way instead of the easy way, and solve - optimize the result.