I'm working on a little extracurricular side project to bolster my html5/css3/jquery knowledge and I'm working with Parallax Scrolling but I can't seem to get the bottom image to scroll into view. It seems stuck behind the above it and no matter what I do I can't seem to pull it down into view.
There should be a giant dollar bill in the bottom black section where it says 'Abe is the money'
my url is : http://www.petegetscreative.com/abe/index.html
inspiration came from this tutorial: http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/html-css-techniques/simple-parallax-scrolling-technique/
cheers
I think the dollar bill image is too small.
Looking at this Fiddle, when I increase the size of the dollar bill image to 200%, it becomes visible in the preview.
#known {
background: url(http://www.petegetscreative.com/abe/images/US-$5-SC-1953-Fr.1655.2.jpg) 50% 0 no-repeat fixed;
background-color: #000;
background-size: 200%;
height: 600px;
margin: 0 auto;
width: 100%;
max-width: 1920px;
position: relative;
padding-top: 50px;
}
So what's probably happening is the height of the image is less than the difference in scroll positions. Try a larger (taller) image.
I believe that the problem could be the dollar image is less than section tag and the script you're running put the bg image with negative Y position. You can make a test making the image bigger than the 650px ( the section's height ).
Related
I used jquery-ui plugin to realize vertical slider function. I want to realize gradient effect, so I use background images, include bg/range and slide handle. The question is when I slide dot handle to bottom, bg image is compressed. Here is my example code.
jsFiddle
#head_slider .ui-slider-range {
background: url(https://image.ibb.co/hTvN6a/head_slider_h.png) 0px center no-repeat;
}
#head_slider_bg {
position: absolute;
width: 72px;
height: 704px;
right: 100px;
background: url(https://image.ibb.co/mUfpma/head_slider_n.png) center center no-repeat;
}
and the same way to horizontal slider is fine! That's confusing me. Thanks for your reading and help.
The problem is not that the background image is compressed, but the CSS rule border-radius applied to the verticle bar becomes different. When slider slides to the bottom, the height of the verticle bar is less then 60px (the value you set to border-radius), thus the actual border radius will be decreased.
A simple fix to this problem is add a min-height constraint to that element, which you can refer to the updated fiddle (add min-height: 60px at Line 79 of CSS).
For more detail about the behavior of browser handle border-radius, refer to Cornor Overlap section of specification.
The issue I’m having here is with the x-ray image behind the one in the front. They do not line up. It only does when i stretch the browser out to 1920px. Anything smaller than that causes it to misalign. Note that I purposely set the image to be at 100% width which I know is not responsive.
I want to keep the effect of the image getting cut off on the right and left of the browser. Ideally I'd like both images to be centered and aligned when I decrease the size of the browser.
Here is the Github link:
https://gist.github.com/siravani/71b8d447acaca8b34acfcab82af58c06
If you added a fiddle that would have been a lot easier but all you need to do is add background-size:cover to #flesh css rule
html, body, #flesh {
position: relative;
margin: 0;
height: auto;
max-width: 100%;
background: url("http://www2.yapstone.com/l/109192/2017-04-04/4c61s2/109192/37539/buildings.jpg") no-repeat;
background-position: center;
background-size:cover;
}
this way your background image will fit in container and will match with the original image.
Here is a working fiddle https://jsfiddle.net/w2jjaLn5/
I recently learned about the background-size property thanks to this topic
Set size on background image with CSS?
As you can guess, I am trying to make a background image take up the full screen and no more/no less. Here is my fiddle
https://jsfiddle.net/1x7ytdaa/
document.body.style.backgroundImage = "url('http://www.crystalinks.com/ColosseumNight2.jpg')";
document.body.style.backgroundSize = "contain";
Here is what the contain property does
Scale the image to the largest size such that both its width and its height can fit inside the content area
It shouldn't matter what size the image is. If it's smaller, it should be scaled to the full size of the screen. If it's larger, it should be scaled down.
In the fiddle, you can see that the image is repeated 5 times horizontally and 5 1/2 times vertically.
I've tried 100% 100% and while the width stretches the full screen, it still shows the same image 5 1/2 times vertically
I can not explain this behavior. Does anyone have any ideas?
Two things:
background-repeat
width and height of body
As you can in an edited fiddle, the problem is that the default value of background-repeat is repeat. Therefore, the image will be repeated rather than stretched. That doesn't solve everything, though, as the body and HTML elements should have a width defined that is 100%.
html, body {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
document.body.style.backgroundImage = "url('http://www.crystalinks.com/ColosseumNight2.jpg')";
document.body.style.backgroundSize = "contain";
document.body.style.backgroundRepeat = "no-repeat";
If you want to cover the whole screen, use cover instead of contain. Cover makes sure that the element is completely covered, whereas contain simply makes sure that the background image is maximally contained (which can cause white space).
This might help:
position: fixed;
background-position: center;
overflow-x: hidden;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
background: url(img/xxx.jpg);
background-size: 100%;
background-attachment: fixed;
overflow-y: scroll;
I've been trying for sometime to replicate an effect seen on this website:
http://www.gregparmasmith.com/
If you play around with the width and height of the window, the images keep proportionate w/h based on their aspect ratio. The images are always loaded with a consistent height, making this slideshow look very nice.
Also notice how wider images (vs thinner images) are resized when just the width of the browser window (not width and height together) is reduced - The images bounce down from the top margin.
He seems to be programming this differently than most responsive jquery image plugins I've seen. There is a parent div container, but it has a static size and seems to not govern the position/sizing of its child images.
Looking at the source, the images top,left,width,height css properties are dynamically being altered.
Any suggestions for how to do this??
The effect seen on that page can be accomplished with just html and css. No javascript needed. He's using percentages as the values for his margins so that as the browser size gets smaller, so does the calculated pixel size of the left and right margins of the div that contains the images. Then by setting the img width to a max-width of a fixed pixel size, say 400px, it will ensure it will only reach a certain width as it does on very large screens.
Then by setting the "width" to a percentage like maybe 100% the image will automatically resize to the size of the containing div because that div is responding the size of the browser.
something like this:
#inside {
max-width: 300px;
margin: 0 auto;
margin-top: 20%;
margin-bottom: 20%;
}
#inside img {
width: 100%
}
http://jsfiddle.net/wRNJ7/1/
I have found a pretty close solution here in this thread:
Vertically center image on page and maintain aspect ratio on resize
Here's a good working demo:
Demo
html, body {height: 100%}
body {
position: relative;
padding: 0;
margin:0;
font-family: sans-serif;
}
.image {
position: relative;
left: 0px;
height: 100%;
background-position: 50% 50%;
background-size: cover;
background-attachment: scroll;
text-align: center;
}
.wrap {
height: 100%;
overflow: hidden;
position: relative;
}
img {
max-width: 70%;
max-height: 70%;
margin: auto;
position: absolute;
top: 0; left: 0; bottom: 0; right: 0;
}
This effect is achieved without any javascript, which at first I thought was undoable. In this demo, the action of the resizing is a little different. In the original website I was trying to model (http://www.gregparmasmith.com/12), it is "clear" that resizing happens only when necessary, so that for a thin image (ex. 500x100): When the browser window is made as thin, no shrinking would occur. Resizing of the image would occur only if the width of the image would exceed the width of the browser.
In this jsfiddle, I think I can notice this same action is happening, but it's not as obvious.
The problem is: I have a huge background image and content with those characteristics:
the content is centered with margin: auto; and it has a fixed width
the position of the content is in relation to the image (like it fits in the middle of the image)
this connection is only horizontally (vertical scrolling moves everything around as expected)
This works fine, actually, on desktop devices with position fixed on the background image.
But the problem is: When I resize the window until it's smaller than the content, the content is fixed on the left side, but the background image is still centered, as expected. In this case the connection between both elements gets lost.
I have this JavaScript that does the trick, but this is of course some overhead I want to avoid as it isn't smooth anytime due to the calculation:
$(window).resize(function(){
container.css('left', (body.width() - img.width()) / 2);
});
I also tried things like that:
<div id="test" style="
position: absolute;
z-index: 0;
top: 0;
left: 0;
width: 100%:
height: 100%;
background: transparent url(path) no-repeat fixed center top;
"></div>
But this results in the same issue described above.
Is there any elegant CSS solution for this problem?
Demo
Try it yourself
NOTE
The image size is fixed and known and it never gets scaled by the browser.
Is this working for you? http://jsfiddle.net/wPmrm/24/
HTML
<div class="background">
<div class="content">
CONTENT
<br><br>
This example works fine until you the viewport size gets smaller than this content. After that the image isn't sticky anymore.
<br><br>
And check out vertical scrolling.
<div style="height:1500px;"></div>
END
</div>
</div>
CSS
div.background {
min-width: 740px;
background: url('http://placehold.it/1600x1050') top center fixed no-repeat;
}
div.content {
width: 700px;
height: 2000px;
margin: auto;
padding: 50px 20px;
background: none;
opacity: 0.7;
color: #333;
}
.background should be the wrapper for .content with a centered background and have a minimum-width of the .contents width+padding.
Update from comments:
http://jsfiddle.net/wPmrm/28/
We'll have to use a media-query, so when the width is at max 740px we change the background position. Oh and we set background-attachment to fixed again.
CSS added
#media screen and (max-width:740px) {
div.background {
background-position: -435px 0;
}
}
I don't see why it is -435px ((1600-740)/2 would be 430) but it seems to be the most accurate value.