I don't see anything here, it doesn't seem to work without javascript for those who have JS turned off for privacy folks like me.
edit: downvoters, I browse the web and don't use JS for privacy reasons, I think it is perfectly reasonable for this to work with CSS only, but downvote I guess..
This is cool and impressive.
At the same time I don't want to see it running on any website that I use. And especially - I wouldn't want to see confetti accompany newsletter popups or adding products to basket.
This has its place, e.g. on a completion of a game or some such.
Yep, on one of the products I built, I use this when a person subscribes to the paid tier. It's really nice, not too obtrusive, but it's fun! Plus, it only happens on that specific scenario, so it's not overdone.
Pipedrive CRM also does this when you close a deal, they even previously had a person shooting a hoop or something, that was nice. It's rewarding!
The strange thing is this can be used effectively. I don't know about full-screen like this, but we were visiting a client recently who used a certain project management software and when you closed an item out, the button changed to green and had this effect on it.
It was subtle, but noticeable enough that after the meeting another developer and I both said "that was a pretty neat effect". It conveyed the sense of "yay, progress!".
Just make it optional.
Asana does that, and it's optional. I like it whenever it happens too!
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/@media/pref...
You can site your browser to prefer reduced motion. Site owners and library maintainers should be respecting this when implementing things like confetti. This library in particular has a `disableForReducedMotion` option.
I think the only "legitimate" use would be something like YouTube's like button, which has a cool animation (and vibrates the device if using the mobile app). Very pleasant UX.
Wouldn't it be crazy if there was a snow storm that had so many flakes, the gravitational constant was reduced because of the extra time it took to render them all?
The excellent performance characteristics of the natural world may indeed be the best rebuttal of the popular theory that we live in a computer simulation!
Good simulations have constant time step and may not run in real time. From inside such simulation, you would never know.
I was introduced to this idea by the book Permutation City. Great read.
The idea on Permutation City is way crazier than a mere computer simulation.
I agree, it's awesome. I wish more scifi authors were as ambitious as Egan.
It's only meaningful to consider that our world is a simulation if it is an imperfect one, otherwise you're just using "simulation" as an awkward synonym for "reality".
Click the "snow" button enough (https://catdad.github.io/canvas-confetti/) and you'll get a horizontal line separating the pre-slowdown flakes from the post-slowdown flakes. I suppose that's the kind of simulation imperfection that we might look for.
Personally, I don't think we're hacking our way out of this one any time soon, so I'm happy to just call it reality.
So the trick for performant animation here is to draw on canvas and put the canvas in front of all other elements but disable pointer events on canvas so that you can still interact with the page.
Correct! Disable Pointer Events has surprising utility!
What if you wanted to add the requirement that the user had to click on 1 specific piece of confetti?
Add a click event listener to the body and overlay the event-coordinates on the canvas.
Will the canvas allow you to hit-test the confetti piece given the coordinate?
Then you have a fun programming challenge.
You have also Party.js library: https://party.js.org/
OP script feels way more performant on mobile.
OP is more performant on desktop Windows as well. The other one visibly lags when animating even a single cannon of confetti.
And on Firefox for Mac. Noticed dropped frames pretty consistently in party.js. No such problem with Canvas Confetti, even when there are significantly more particles on screen. I had to increase the count to a point where I couldn't see gaps between them before I saw any lag whatsoever.
Ah, but which one is smaller?
10.4 kB Minified, 4.2kB Minified + Gzipped https://bundlephobia.com/package/canvas-confetti@1.9.2
28.3kB Minified, 7.4kB Minified + Gzipped https://bundlephobia.com/package/party-js@2.2.0
caveat: I don't know how bundlephobia works, it might not give the best representation of the final size of the package. Probably doesn't take into account code-splitting or being able to import just what you need. I'm just using it as a quick and general overview.
Looks like confetti one beats it by a few KB gzipped so either works depending on which one has the feature you need, unless you're really trying to squeeze those kb.
Probably doesn't take into account code-splitting or being able to import just what you need
Correct. It doesn't.
This reminds me of some good times doing web development in high school in 2015. I made a small website with confetti to ask a girl to homecoming (very nerdy looking back). Back when making a website felt like a superpower to a kid. It seems like it wasn't this package based on age, but it was a really nice animation.
I love a fun little projects like this that are purely for a good time. That's why I started programming and it's still a driving force.
Did it work? Did she say yes?
She said no - but we went on to be great friends still to this day, so I'd say it did work. We joke about it still.
I knew someone that made a PowerPoint presentation for their partner for Valentine's Day. So you're doing great in comparison
That's nice :)
I'm curious though - did you use tabs or spaces?
Just fyi, confetti are candies in italy. Not bits of paper.
Can someone code and make a pull request to properly handle display of those for Italian users? (see https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confetto for what they look like)
Ah, so basically the same thing, but they hit much harder when they land?
Interesting. It's also cognate with "confection". https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=confetti
1815, "small pellets made of lime or soft plaster, used in Italy during carnival by the revelers for pelting one another in the streets," [...] the custom was adopted in England by early 19c. for weddings and other occasions, with symbolic tossing of little bits of paper (which are called confetti by 1846).
It's nice to hear we are not alone in using fake foreign words. We really like to use fake English words in Italian so it's only fair they do that too.
FYI the word for this in Italian is coriandoli.
Cute animation, but I find it hard to say that the confetti animation is useful
this says more about you than it does about the confetti animation
Twitter uses a similar animation on your profile when it's your birthday. That's one use case and I am sure there are more.
I think Facebook did something similar if you typed "congratulations" in a comment.
I think there is no need to specify 'useful' in the title.
How about as a motivational aid and means of verifying that your code has compiled: https://squint-cljs.github.io/squint/
True. But also the use of the word made me genuinely interested and I laughed by how not really useful it is. Upvoted.
it's as useful as actual confetti irl, so: 100%
I wish they would have called the reset function confetti.resetti()
Somebody give this person a job! If they already have a job, give them a cookie
This being Javascript, you can at least fix this locally with a simple "confetti.resetti = confetti.reset".
There are some software engineering costs to this approach, but, as is transparently obvious to all thoughtful observers, the benefits massively outweigh them, so I say go for it.
Useful for annoying your visitors?
Why on earth would they not enable the setting which honours the `prefers-reduces-motion` media flag for users who don't want stuff flying all over their screens?!
Agreed. I see really no good reason not to enable this by default.
Go multi click on the run button for the "School Pride" demo. I double dare you.
Challenge accepted. I clicked until the confetti froze up. I was impressed while I couldn't trigger new confetti of any kind, the page still scrolled, and the tab could be closed without killing my browser. It was fun.
Neat library. Also, brilliant docs!
Looks a lot like Raycast one :)
This is really good. That image you have on the README now makes me want to have a depth of field effect on the confettis as well as multiple layers!
Interesting optical illusion – if I focus on side of the Custom Canvas demo and repeatedly click "Run", some of the confetti in my peripheral vision appears to leave the canvas. It's as if my brain is filling in what it expects to happen.
Is that a known phenomenon?
Used this to build a confetti inbox for Shortwave's April fools [1] a few years back. Really run library, and easy to integrate.
This reminds me of the early Internet in the 90s and 2000s, you had falling snow and star animations everywhere.
This is a Javascript library, but it couldn't have been JS back in those days.
Anyone have an idea how people built stuff like this without JS? I'm curious.
Interesting!
I used this in a prototype recently and was impressed by how configurable it is.
Very nice, not a fan of this kind of animation but at least it's smooth!
I love this. Lovely work! I had done something similar a few years ago for an edtech company I was working at. [0] It uses threejs and tries to "bake" the particle animation before trying to play it, but I don't think it ever made a huge difference in performance. I think I'll reach out and mention they could change to your library for a nicer experience!
Aside from being a cool and useful library, this is a good example of what John Ousterhout calls "deep modules" in Philosophy of Software Design.
It's very easy to use the most basic version of this library (summon confetti) but you can get a lot out of it by exploring the options presented (snow, specific colours, different confetti effects, etc.).
This is elegant. Shows the passion that goes into building some thing that looks so beautiful and easy to integrate.
This is great, has a ton of options and other solutions are way more laggy
I solve crosswords on downforacross.com and solving a puzzle there results in confetti.
Maybe they could use some of this better performing code to make it feel lighter.
Other than "fun" sites and sparing usage ... I wouldn't want to see such animations everywhere though.
I added confetti to our salespeople's admin dashboard for when they make a sale. Surprisingly enjoyable and motivating.
From the demo page:
If you happened to get curious and changed the particle count to 400 or so, you saw something disappointing. An even "flattened cone" look to the confetti, making it look way too perfect and ruining the illusion.
I love it! This kind of attention to detail is rare in this world, and I cherish it wherever I find it - whether it's in statistical visualization, movie props, or website confetti.
(As a solution, I'd probably go for changing the random distribution directly. I'd check of course, but I'm guessing the real-life distribution approximates a gaussian.)
Neat! Would love to see a persistent option in which the confetti gathers at the bottom of the screen/page. Even better if there was something that could persist all the confetti received across all websites!
The effect is surprisingly smooth on my outdated mobile phone. I recently implemented a similar effect with a hardware accelerated 3D rendering API (albiet with limited collision physics), and it didn't perform nearly as well targeting WebGL.
Great job! Nice and realistic. Did you build Framework integrator like useEffect for React or Directive for Angular? It could be great to enforce developper adoption.
I pressed the power button on my monitor, and now the website is all black.
seriously what is up with people who believe JS should not exist on the web? We are way past that now. It's not gonna happen. Reactive apps are just required for some parts of the modern web.
They said it: privacy
I threw away my laptop, now the website is completely gone.
Thank you for the laugh haha
Hard to get much more obvious than that. How else did you think this was implemented as a front-end library?
If someone told me it was pure CSS, I'd believe them. I'm not a frontend dev, so I'm always impressed by what you can now do without having to import a whole JS library.
I am a frontend dev and agree it could be done with CSS similar to this [0]
[0] https://codepen.io/jh3y/pen/oNqdmbW
a whole JS library gasp
libraries are in every language.
The developer has of course provided a print stylesheet (expect no less from a pro). Just print it, frame it, hang it up on the wall and voilà! A no-JS confetti demo right there in your living room.
Sadly, the demo does require scissors and a colour printer/coloured markers to experience fully.
now that you mention it it would be neat to implement this as a bunch of overlapping gifs or a fanciful css animation