How does this compare to the classic css-native parallax effect? Before the scroll timeline APIs you'd use the "perspective" css property to create a container where the z plane is n pixels away from the screen, and then position each layer within it at a different z distance using transform: translateZ
That method is GPU accelerated too, so it is performant compared to some js solutions, and has worked well in every browser for around a decade
I like the idea of the scroll-timeline though, just keen to understand what the advantage is for this
OP here, thanks for asking. While the `perspective` technique works too, it has the downside of needing a careful combination of scroller elements and properties.
This approach adds a single class to the image container and that's it. Plus you can control many aspects of the animation such as entry/exit ranges, and make it control other properties like opacity or color, for example.
I know browser support is still lacking, but it will get there eventually. I'm not using this in production code yet, but I think it's useful to experiment with these new CSS APIs.
No doubt quite a few folk with the same question. Keen to understand performance tradeoffs.
Obvious comparison note would be that the "new" method currently enjoys somewhat limited browser support (no Firefox without a flag, and only since Safari 26)
I was wondering the same thing. That translateZ is a bit fiddly to get right, so I could believe this is a bit easier to use, maybe? And presumably this could be used for other properties besides position, like colors, opacity or blurs.
The JS and bot check are for making additional functionality, beyond just showing the example, work easily. I.e. editing and sharing edits from a browser. If all you want is a static example, feel free to make it without these things.
You can make some really cool stuff with css scroll animations. I used SVG paths with a scroll animated dash offset to draw an image while scrolling. Zero javascript, it feels so smooth. https://thomaswelter.nl (the background)
firefox android does not support CSS animation-timeline, and firefox desktop needs layout.css.scroll-driven-animations.enabled. This probably should not be used for any critical features.
In a world where it's increasingly overlooked, I'm glad the author mentions disabling it respecting user settings. I do think it should be reversed and only enabled with the `@media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference)`, but that is the opinion of someone who gets negative value from animations and is bemused by how much dev and compute time is spent on them.
How does this compare to the classic css-native parallax effect? Before the scroll timeline APIs you'd use the "perspective" css property to create a container where the z plane is n pixels away from the screen, and then position each layer within it at a different z distance using transform: translateZ
That method is GPU accelerated too, so it is performant compared to some js solutions, and has worked well in every browser for around a decade
I like the idea of the scroll-timeline though, just keen to understand what the advantage is for this
OP here, thanks for asking. While the `perspective` technique works too, it has the downside of needing a careful combination of scroller elements and properties.
This approach adds a single class to the image container and that's it. Plus you can control many aspects of the animation such as entry/exit ranges, and make it control other properties like opacity or color, for example.
I know browser support is still lacking, but it will get there eventually. I'm not using this in production code yet, but I think it's useful to experiment with these new CSS APIs.
No doubt quite a few folk with the same question. Keen to understand performance tradeoffs.
Obvious comparison note would be that the "new" method currently enjoys somewhat limited browser support (no Firefox without a flag, and only since Safari 26)
I was wondering the same thing. That translateZ is a bit fiddly to get right, so I could believe this is a bit easier to use, maybe? And presumably this could be used for other properties besides position, like colors, opacity or blurs.
That sounds interesting but it would be a whole lot more interesting if the page was itself an example of said effect!
I was also looking for examples.
i was waiting for the effect to show up
A demo https://codepen.io/editor/phelm/pen/019e87f5-dfec-7372-9849-...
There's me scrolling up and down and thinking "hey, it's not working!" But it's behind a flag on Firefox: https://caniuse.com/?search=view-timeline-name
tried 4 browsers, didn't work in any of them
FWIW it works on iPhone safari
I don’t think it did for me. Are you on iOS 26?
Doesnt work on any browser for me
It's been behind a flag for ages. Maybe because of performance issues?
Noticed the same thing. In Mac Safari it works without setting any flags.
Only worked for me on mobile (vivaldi android) not on vivaldi / chrome / edge on Desktop.
What an age where we need a pile of javascript as well as a bot check to demo a simple CSS trick.
The JS and bot check are for making additional functionality, beyond just showing the example, work easily. I.e. editing and sharing edits from a browser. If all you want is a static example, feel free to make it without these things.
You can make some really cool stuff with css scroll animations. I used SVG paths with a scroll animated dash offset to draw an image while scrolling. Zero javascript, it feels so smooth. https://thomaswelter.nl (the background)
Android Firefox: there is no background image.
firefox android does not support CSS animation-timeline, and firefox desktop needs layout.css.scroll-driven-animations.enabled. This probably should not be used for any critical features.
In a world where it's increasingly overlooked, I'm glad the author mentions disabling it respecting user settings. I do think it should be reversed and only enabled with the `@media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference)`, but that is the opinion of someone who gets negative value from animations and is bemused by how much dev and compute time is spent on them.
It would be awesome to put an interactive example right in the article.
Idk about anyone here but I find the effect disorienting.
Yes. I'm a little more sensitive than average, but not enough to turn off animations, and this is uncomfortable.
Love the one-variable design where scale and translate stay in sync automatically, just wish Firefox would get off the flag already.
Thanks!