I do like the idea of having a common and open format for animations. That being said, I see quite a few web devs reaching for Lottie (which will add quite a few hundred kilobytes for the library/wrapper, and some extra ones for each animation), instead of learning more about CSS- and SVG-based animations (which would be a multitude smaller and more easily adjustable). In that sense, I also don’t like how they continuously boast about Lottie’s small size on the main website, while only comparing it to gif and png files (and not mentioning SVG/CSS animations).
I’m sure it is a good fit for usage on native mobile apps, though.
nine_k · 23s ago
The point of Lottie is not simple animations like CSS transitions, but complex arbitrary animations, more like a cartoon than a minor piece of motion.
A good example is the Telegram messenger that uses Lottie as the format of animated stickers, e.g. https://tlgrm.eu/stickers/Princess (click to animate).
throwanem · 17m ago
Where it really excels IME is as a target format for design authoring tools, most notably After Effects, which is discussed above the fold in the linked article as the original motivation for the library and the file format. No one is writing stuff like that by hand to begin with.
I've worked with Lottie animations as a mobile app dev, but never authored one.
afavour · 1m ago
Not to mention CSS animations (and the newer Web Animations API) allow hardware acceleration while libraries like this do not.
legulere · 10m ago
Shouldn't it be possible to compile Lottie-animations down to SVG+JS? Is that maybe just something that's still missing?
echelon · 7m ago
> instead of learning more about CSS- and SVG-based animations
Contrarian opinion: Flash was one of the best things about Web 1.0.
The forced move to CSS and the constellation of other "standards" still hasn't caught up to what Flash once offered us.
Flash was all at once a video format, animation format, programming environment, video player, interactive UI system, game programming engine, multiplayer MMO game dev engine, infographics system -- actually, it was literally everything you wanted it to be. And it was so simple that even kids could use it.
If Adobe had opened everything - the format, the player, etc. - it could have become something tremendous that is still with us.
I think there's space for this to be rethought and redone. We shouldn't be so dogmatic that CSS and SVG and HTML and Javascript are the only way. They've had nearly 40 years to shine and we're still struggling with the same issues.
We should be trying to reinvent the wheel.
Benanov · 33s ago
Flash was one of those things that tried to do too much, and some of its things started being at cross-purposes with each other. The video conflicted with its roots as a vector/animation studio, and that's why Apple famously didn't use it - it ended up being a battery hog.
A lot of interests in web-based video wanted DRM, which meant it was never going to be usable by Free Software.
It was trying to do too much and then the usual corporate mismanagement led to its demise.
bsimpson · 38s ago
Unfortunately doing that many things means the codebase must have been rather big. Big enough that auditing and removing licensed code (for instance, the video codecs) seems to be more than they had the stomach for.
It really was a wonderful tool that is still unmatched for creative coding.
zdragnar · 20m ago
Having had minimal experience with both Lottie and Rive on the implementation / embedding side, I can say that my experience with Rive was strictly better.
Does anyone know if there's something I was missing about Lottie if I needed to choose between them in the future?
cjbgkagh · 6m ago
I had never head of Rive before and it looks like something I can use in one of my projects. Thanks, this is the kind of stuff that keeps me addicted to HN.
I’m sure it is a good fit for usage on native mobile apps, though.
A good example is the Telegram messenger that uses Lottie as the format of animated stickers, e.g. https://tlgrm.eu/stickers/Princess (click to animate).
I've worked with Lottie animations as a mobile app dev, but never authored one.
Contrarian opinion: Flash was one of the best things about Web 1.0.
The forced move to CSS and the constellation of other "standards" still hasn't caught up to what Flash once offered us.
Flash was all at once a video format, animation format, programming environment, video player, interactive UI system, game programming engine, multiplayer MMO game dev engine, infographics system -- actually, it was literally everything you wanted it to be. And it was so simple that even kids could use it.
If Adobe had opened everything - the format, the player, etc. - it could have become something tremendous that is still with us.
I think there's space for this to be rethought and redone. We shouldn't be so dogmatic that CSS and SVG and HTML and Javascript are the only way. They've had nearly 40 years to shine and we're still struggling with the same issues.
We should be trying to reinvent the wheel.
A lot of interests in web-based video wanted DRM, which meant it was never going to be usable by Free Software.
It was trying to do too much and then the usual corporate mismanagement led to its demise.
It really was a wonderful tool that is still unmatched for creative coding.
Does anyone know if there's something I was missing about Lottie if I needed to choose between them in the future?