Re:Shader-like holographic effects with CSS
by dylan604 on Thursday July 07, 2022 @03:58PM
(#32018583)
What if your mask/specular layers were made of an SVG that you then animate the colors within to "cycle"?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Shader-like holographic effects with CSS
by aaaaaaaaaaab on Thursday July 07, 2022 @05:14PM
(#32019520)
Color cycling works with paletted images. CSS blending modes work in RGB with a limited set of blend functions. The closest thing to color cycling is "filter: hue-rotate(...)", but you can't limit the colors to a particular subset of the hue wheel, so it's gonna be useless.
Re:Shader-like holographic effects with CSS
by dylan604 on Thursday July 07, 2022 @06:23PM
(#32020339)
Right, but the colors within the SVG are what is cycling. It's not a rasterized image, so you could create a "pixel map". I'm not saying it's not convoluted as hell, but the effect [w|c]ould look paletted
Re:Shader-like holographic effects with CSS
by aaaaaaaaaaab on Thursday July 07, 2022 @06:45PM
(#32020588)
At that point what's the purpose of having a mask image + blending at all?
Re:Shader-like holographic effects with CSS
by dylan604 on Thursday July 07, 2022 @09:25PM
(#32021911)
because you can now overlay onto other RGB rasterized images
The SVG is just the spectral map. We're using its native possibilites to pull off some other crazy wild hare of an idea to do things that other image compositing programs do, but in a browser. I'm way way outside a box here, but that's where I prefer to play. This is one of those things where I'm taking an idea that someone developed with a specific idea, but I'm jerking the wheel hard left to suggest something zanny just because it might be interesting and cool. Following directions and creator's intent is boring ;-)
Re:Shader-like holographic effects with CSS
by eurasiantiger on Thursday July 07, 2022 @11:29PM
(#32022737)
You can also overlay animated <canvas> elements.
Re:Shader-like holographic effects with CSS
by aaaaaaaaaaab on Friday July 08, 2022 @08:18AM
(#32026229)
I don’t really get what you’re saying, but ok.