The friction Dave describes where changing one param effects all the other params in an animation brought to mind this section of an old Bret Victor talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-OyoVcbwWE&t=716s
Bouncy animations that overshoot just seem like a bad idea in general. The purpose of a UI animation is to guide the eye, but the bounce explicitly introduces a reversal of motion at the end before stopping.
Easing functions are just very cargo culty. We've had the same basic set that dates from the Flash era. Now there's an Apple variant that's just a parametric version of the same idea, but it lacks guaranteed continuity and it's even harder to control?
Personally I've had far better results using the repeated-lerping-towards-a-target trick, aka a true exponential ease. When stacked, you get a classic LTI (linear time invariant) system, and the math around how those behave is well established.
Classic hand-drawn animation does often use stretching and squeezing to emphasize and to create a sense of anticipation, but that's very different and always dependent on the specific motion. You can't automate that by making everything act like jello.
Hi, author here! When writing this, I was thinking more in the space of procedural character animation and motion graphics than UI animations. That's part of why I want a system with nice parameters, so that I do have the ability to fine tune and tweak the motion to fit the context. My background is in classical animation so it's something I might just keyframe by hand in a non-code context, or in Flash when it's easier to jump back and forth between code and non code. Although I think having it parameterized still can lead to interesting opportunities for variation in procedural animation!
There was an old experiment of mine where I tried to mix match easing function, maybe it'll be of interest to you
https://codepen.io/Trung0246/pen/jxvvzY
The friction Dave describes where changing one param effects all the other params in an animation brought to mind this section of an old Bret Victor talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-OyoVcbwWE&t=716s
Bouncy animations that overshoot just seem like a bad idea in general. The purpose of a UI animation is to guide the eye, but the bounce explicitly introduces a reversal of motion at the end before stopping.
Easing functions are just very cargo culty. We've had the same basic set that dates from the Flash era. Now there's an Apple variant that's just a parametric version of the same idea, but it lacks guaranteed continuity and it's even harder to control?
Personally I've had far better results using the repeated-lerping-towards-a-target trick, aka a true exponential ease. When stacked, you get a classic LTI (linear time invariant) system, and the math around how those behave is well established.
Classic hand-drawn animation does often use stretching and squeezing to emphasize and to create a sense of anticipation, but that's very different and always dependent on the specific motion. You can't automate that by making everything act like jello.
Hi, author here! When writing this, I was thinking more in the space of procedural character animation and motion graphics than UI animations. That's part of why I want a system with nice parameters, so that I do have the ability to fine tune and tweak the motion to fit the context. My background is in classical animation so it's something I might just keyframe by hand in a non-code context, or in Flash when it's easier to jump back and forth between code and non code. Although I think having it parameterized still can lead to interesting opportunities for variation in procedural animation!