6 ms·
Interactive CSS3 lighting effects
- cleverjake 15y agowow, great job.
- whiskers 15y agoStunning result in this case, and with minimal assets (an image, some CSS) - great! Sadly doesn't obviously transfer well to anything other than a flat glossy object though.
- smlacy 15y agoI don't get the "interactive" part? Can I interact with this? It feels like a static image to me.
- thomasxiii 15y agoPop that baby open in Safari.
- EvanYou 15y agoUse a webkit browser.
- emn13 15y agoFor some weird reason his javascript only sets -webkit- prefixed CSS properties; it's quite likely this would work in firefox (and possibly eventually IE10), were it not for this.
- thomasxiii 15y agoYou're absolutely right. Developing for multiple browsers is just so damn tedious. For experimental stuff like this I stick to webkit.
- smlacy 15y agoI'm on Linux, so Chrome is all I've got.
- arb99 15y agoworks for me in chrome 15.0.874.121 on osx
- morsch 15y agoWorks for me in Chrome 17/Ubuntu.
- tikhonj 15y agoIt works for me on Chrome 15 under Fedora.
- dantheman0207 15y agoWorking flawlessly on Ubuntu 11.10 with Chrome 15.0.874.121
- EvanYou 15y agoVery sexy. I won't be surprised if I see this on the Apple home page one day.
- untog 15y ago(Best in Safari) I know this is just an experimental page, but it still makes me shudder to see this kind of phrase reappearing on web sites.
- kinship 15y agoWe call your response "Emo Nerd Rage". Safari is the best browser, after all.
- funkah 15y agoGotta start somewhere.
- lambda 15y agoI really don't mind that sort of phrase when it's pointing out that the cutting-edge features that they are demonstrating, while they are on the standards track, currently work best in a particular browser. On an actual production web page? Sure, that's awful. Blocking people on other browsers from viewing (like Apple did with their HTML5 showcase)? Yeah, that's bad. Demonstrating a technique that still requires vendor prefixes, and not applying all of the vendor prefixes that work? Well, that's just lazy. But informing people that the effects you are demonstrating work best in a particular browser because the other browsers don't happen to implement those features yet, or aren't fully compatible yet, isn't bad. It's just preventing confusion for people who come there and don't see the given effect. In order for web standards to progress, we need experimentation. We need early implementations, that test out the space, and we need designers who try out these implementations and see what you can do with them. And yeah, when that happens, they will be experimenting with features that aren't supported everywhere, and will create examples that only work on one or two browsers. Complain when you see this in production. Complain when you see people recommending user agent sniffing. But for early stage experimentation? It's not a problem.
- grunar 15y agoYet another reason that Flash is going the way of the dodo.
- alabut 15y agoMaybe more like a llama - still around but nowhere near as useful or in the same numbers. Llamas were like the cows of the Aztec era.
- deepkut 15y agoThis is absolutely gorgeous.
- businessbingo 15y agoLooks fantastic :) Would be event better if it wasn't (Best in Safari)
- Adolph_Jobs 15y agoThe guy's logo looks like a ripoff of the Arch logo :/