I'm having trouble getting a website to work properly. It has numerous moving backgrounds and makes use of the css-invert filter.
Please have a look here:
http://epicstudios.de/blackwhite/
My problem is, that even average computers have problems processing the moving background, which is essential for the effect I want the site to have. I figured that the problem might be that I have too many divs with moving backgrounds, but since these Divs have different, inverted background-images, I can't just leave them transparent. Or is there a way to use the invert-filter without giving the div a background-image, so that it inverts the content of the div beneath it? I hope thats clear.
My script for the moving background looks like this:
(function($) {
var x = 0;
var y = 0;
var bg = $("body,.overlay,.center_cirlce,.left_circle,.right-circle,.enter,.enter_outer,.enter_inner");
bg.css('backgroundPosition', x + 'px' + ' ' + y + 'px');
window.setInterval(function() {
bg.css("backgroundPosition", -x + 'px' + ' ' + -y + 'px');
y++;
}, 70);
})(jQuery);
I would like to know, if there is a way to reduce the CPU usage or whatever makes it stutter that awfully, without having to give up the effects I'm aiming for... Or whether I have bad programming somewhere, which I should change to improve performance.
Thank You!
Well, animating background-position is always a bad idea. Especially on huge images like these. Try to put the background images in their own container and animate that container with transform: translate() or even transform: translate3d(). It'll be much much smoother.
If you want to do it with JS i can recommend Greensocks TweenMax Animation library. It's damn fast and it'll use CSS transforms when available and fall back if not.
And adding backface-visibility: hidden to your animated elements will smooth things out too. Problem is, it seems you're using backface-visiblity for that effect on your site. To make things perform better I'd advice you rethink your structure and use animations with CSS transform as much as possible.
Related
I have built a WordPress theme. I came across a website that created a div to follow the user's cursor. The div was enlarged smoothly when the user hovers over a button or a link.
I want to add this nice functionality as an optional feature.
I added a div to the web page, #ambition_cursor and added some basic styling. The div now shows like a blue circle. The circle has position fixed to the top left corner of the site. The position can be changed by adding a CSS translate property.
I managed to make it work with the following code:
var ambition_cursor = document.getElementById("ambition_cursor");
function ambition_mouse(e) {
var ambition_cursor_x = e.clientX; // Get the horizontal coordinate
var ambition_cursor_y = e.clientY; // Get the vertical coordinate
var ambition_cursor_pos = `translate(${ambition_cursor_x}px, ${ambition_cursor_y}px)`;
ambition_cursor.style.transform = ambition_cursor_pos;
}
window.addEventListener('mousemove', ambition_mouse);
The big downside here is the lag (?). There's quite a big delay, especially when moving the mouse around very fast. You can try it out on this site. I also put the situation in a JSFiddle; although the delay doesn't really happen there.
I didn't apply yet much styling (the default cursor is visible, so you can get a better idea of the real position). I first want this to work better, before I spent much time on that.
How can I increase the speed of this, so that the div position follows the mouse more accurately? I'm a beginner, so I don't really know which JavaScript optimisations I should make.
Current code is JavaScript, but jQuery is also an option.
Many thanks in advance!
Update: example how it looks on my computer.
All elements on the page have a transition applied. Remove/override this style and the delay goes away (tested).
As an alternative to the great answer of Joseph Atkinson:
var ambition_cursor = document.getElementById("ambition_cursor");
function ambition_mouse(e) {
ambition_cursor.style.left = e.clientX + 'px'; // Get the horizontal coordinate
ambition_cursor.style.top = e.clientY + 'px' ; // Get the vertical coordinate
}
window.addEventListener('mousemove', ambition_mouse);
See: https://levelup.gitconnected.com/use-javascript-to-make-an-element-follow-the-cursor-3872307778b4
I visited the site example, cracked open the dev console, and found throttled(20, ambition_mouse) It is not a performance issue, and the solution is to not throttle the events. It was too smooth to be a performance issue, which gave me the first clue it had to be an accidental/deliberate effect.
I am trying to achieve a "crt-like" scrolling glitch effect using Javascript and CSS. I have come up with the following code which clones the content and applies clip to make it look like it scrolls while adding random horizontal offset.
function scanglitch() {
var e = $('#wrapper').clone().appendTo('#glitchcontainer');
var i = 0;
e.css({"clip": "rect(" + i + "px,3830px," + (i + 15) + "px,0px)"});
e.css("z-index",200);
var interval = setInterval(function () {
e.css({"clip": "rect(" + i + "px,3830px," + (i + 15) + "px,0px)"});
e.css({"left": Math.round(Math.random() * 10) + "px"});
i+=4;
if (i > window.innerHeight) {
e.remove();
window.clearInterval(interval);
}
}, 40);
}
Fiddle (Click on the text to see the effect)
I am actually quite pleased with the effect, but the implementation is obviously a hack. As a result the performance is unacceptably low (chrome cpu usage spikes from 5% to 50% when the effect is triggered).
Could someone help me figure out a way to achieve this effect in a more elegant and less performance-heavy way?
UPDATE:
I have implemented your suggestions: Using translate instead of left, scrolling with translate instead of a js loop, calculations outside of the css tag and using requestAnimationFrame(). The code is nicer and more predictable now, but the animations are still very taxing.
New fiddle
You can try using requestAnimationFrame (it is available in almost all browsers). Seems to make a big difference in Chrome.
JSFiddle
EDIT
Here's a transition-only version, and while it doesn't even implement the jitter, it's useful for comparison. Surprisingly(?) it shows about the same, if not more, CPU usage. (You can check the Profile and Timeline tabs in Chrome)
CSS3 Transition-Only JSFiddle
Here's some information about why that should be expected. Essentially, CSS transitions and requestAnimationFrame work very similarly under the hood.
I would delegate as much as possible to css transitions. So instead of moving the clip with js in the interval callback, transition it from top to bottom (example of transitioning).
You could try something similar with the left property, there's no random easing function but maybe you could achieve something similar with one of the bounce functions. Maybe change the easing function with an interval that's less frequent than your current one.
Also, just by slowing the interval of your current solution you'd get visually ok results with less CPU usage.
Side-note: for a completely different route you can replicate your html in a canvas and apply some effects to that. Google has plenty of results for "canvas glitch".
Update: here's my version of your latest fiddle
I get about 10 % less cpu usage with it when comparing to yours. Key differences are:
uses a timeout instead of requestAnimationFrame. requestAnimationFrame is meant to keep framerate high and the animation smooth but we don't need that for the random offsetting. Timeout is also better than an interval since the loop function is quaranteed to finish before next iteration starts.
removed the transparent background, since transparency has a rendering cost
See the following fiddle:
[edit: updated fiddle => http://jsfiddle.net/NYZf8/5/ ]
http://jsfiddle.net/NYZf8/1/ (view in different screen sizes, so that ideally the image fits inside the %-width layouted div)
The image should start the animation from the position where it correctly appears after the animation is done.
I don't understand why the first call to setMargin() sets a negative margin even though the logged height for container div and img are the very same ones, that after the jqueryui show() call set the image where I would want it (from the start on). My guess is that somehow the image height is 0/undefined after all, even though it logs fine :?
js:
console.log('img: ' + $('img').height());
console.log('div: ' + $('div').height());
$('img').show('blind', 1500, setMargin);
function setMargin() {
var marginTop =
( $('img').closest('div').height() - $('img').height() ) / 2;
console.log('marginTop: ' + marginTop);
$('img').css('marginTop', marginTop + 'px');
}
setMargin();
Interesting problem...after playing around with your code for a while (latest update), I saw that the blind animation was not actually firing in my browser (I'm testing on Chrome, and maybe it was firing but I wasn't seeing it as the image was never hidden in the first place), so I tried moving it inside the binded load function:
$('img').bind('load', function() {
...
$(this).show('blind', 500);
});
Now that it was animating, it seemed to 'snap' or 'jump' after the animation was complete, and also seemed to appear with an incorrect margin. This smacks of jQuery not being able to correctly calculate the dimensions of something that hadn't been displayed on the screen yet. On top of that, blind seems to need more explicit dimensions to operate correctly. So therein lies the problem: how to calculate elements' rendered dimensions before they've actually appeared on the screen?
One way to do this is to fade in the element whose dimensions you're trying to calculate very slightly - not enough to see yet - do some calculations, then hide it again and prep it for the appearance animation. You can achieve this with jQuery using the fadeTo function:
$('img').bind('load', function() {
$(this).fadeTo(0, 0.01, function() {
// do calculations...
}
}
You would need to work out dimensions, apply them with the css() function, blind the image in and then reset the image styles back to their original states, all thanks to a blind animation that needs these dimensions explicitly. I would also recommend using classes in the css to help you manage things a little better. Here's a detailed working example: jsfiddle working example
Not the most elegant way of doing things, but it's a start. There are a lot more easier ways to achieve seemingly better results, and I guess I just want to know why you're looking to do image blinds and explicit alignment this way? It's just a lot more challenging achieving it with the code you used...anyways, hope this helps! :)
Hey, I'm just wondering how to cycle through a bunch of images, and set them as the background for a div.
What I'm looking to do is: set the first image as the background to a div. Wait X seconds. Set the next image as the background. Wait X seconds … etc. and continue
I've got the following code which works for 1 image.
$(document).ready(function() {
var source = $(".field-field-background img:first").attr("src");
$('.field-field-background img:first').remove();
$('#main-inner').css('background', 'url('+ source +') no-repeat');
});
I'm guessing I need to get an array of the image sources, loop through the array and set it as the background, with a delay somewhere in the loop. Any ideas how I'd do this?
One of the biggest advantages of jQuery is that it has a very robust plug-in community. Many tasks that you might want to accomplished have been tackled by others before you. Particularly with a common task like this, I would recommend looking for a plug-in first, before trying to reinvent the wheel. Many plug-ins have the advantage of having gone through rigorous testing and multiple versions, to result in a polished product.
The jQuery Cycle plug-in would be a good candidate, if you are looking to do a slideshow type effect. If what you want is to cycle the background, while keeping foreground elements, you might look at something more like this: Advanced jQuery background image slideshow
$(document).ready(function() {
Cycler={};
Cycler.src=['path/to/img1', 'path/to/img2', 'path/to/img3'];
Cycler.cur=0;
Cycler.cycle=function() {
if(++Cycler.cur>=Cycler.src.length) {
Cycler.cur=0;
}
$('#main-inner').css('background', 'url('+ Cycler.src[Cycler.cur] +') no-repeat');
setTimeout(Cycler.cycle, 5000);//5 seconds
}
Cycler.cycle();
});
try this:
setInterval(function(){
var source = $(".field-field-background img:first").attr("src");
$('.field-field-background img:first').remove();
$('#main-inner').css('background', 'url('+ source +') no-repeat');
},4000);
The issue I am having is fairly complicated to explain. I have written up a javascript that displays an image slideshow, and it works fairly well, despite using up more resources than I would like
// imgArr[] is populated before
var i = 0;
var pageLoaded = 0;
window.onload = function() {pageLoaded = 1;}
function loaded(i,f) {
if (document.getElementById(i) != null) f();
else if (!pageLoaded) setTimeout('loaded(\''+i+'\','+f+')',100);
}
}
function displaySlideshow() {
document.getElementById(destinationId).innerHTML = '<div id="slideWindow"><img src="'+imgArr[i]+'" />' + '<img src="'+imgArr[i + 1]+'" /></div>';
setTimeout('displaySlideshow()',1000*3);
i++;
if (i >= imgArr.length - 1)
i = 0;
}
loaded(destinationId,displaySlideshow);
So, this script dynamically adds two images to a HTML element, and it is wrapped in a div.
The div is styled with the height and width of the image, with the overflow (the second image) hidden.
The second image is below the first, and the slideshow is meant to go from RIGHT to LEFT.
My inquiry is twofold:
1) Is there a more efficient way of doing this?
2) How would I animate the images? Would I need to put the second image on the right of the first with CSS somehow, and then set a timer to pull the images (via a style) leftward?
I really don't recommend rolling your own animation library. The Facebook Animation Library written by the wonderful Marcel Laverdet is simple to use and comes with a lot of tutorials to get what you want out of your slideshow. (Note: ignore the FBJS stuff, it's exactly the same even if you're using it on your own site.)
If you're not using a framework, I think you'll find a lot of pain ahead of you. If you still don't want to use a framework, at least find one that is liberally licensed, and take a look at the source code. Here's one, for example.
The basic theory is, yes, you set a timer that moves the image on some sort of interval, either fixed or based on some sort of mathematical equation (eg, sin, cos, etc). By setting these intervals close together, and making lots of them, you get an "animation" in javascript. Typically, you'd use some sort of absolute positioning, moving one element off the screen as the other moves on.