These "dots appearing only while (not) focused" are known as "extinction illusions", namely
"25 - Appearing Dots"
is "McAnany's type" [1], and
"26 - Disappearing Dots"
is known as "Ninio's type" [2], according Akiyoshi Kitaoka's materials. (I have recreated them too few years ago [3][4], before getting to the source.)
This is cool, but more as a demonstration of interesting CSS techniques than optical illusions in my opinion.
Also, interestingly, I seem to be able to force myself to "see through" all of these illusions except for induced gradients, which I can't stop seeing unless I cover part of the screen.
33 - color fan: There is another interesting optical illusion here: The fan seems to rotate faster when not directly looking at it.
[deleted]
These are all super dark, for some reason.
You have to actually run them. Otherwise, they're just a dark CodePen preview.
Why the extra step of having to click each one? Only a few of them are interactive.
Because codepens can run javascript. And if a page has 50 of them, it might make the page load time much longer. I know that all these examples are pure CSS, and maybe there is a setting in codepen to disable the "Run" button and automatically run it. Still, getting to decide is generally a better pattern than presuming that that's what the user wants, especially when the fact that the code is inside a codepen makes it explicitly not an integral function of the page. "I thought this was just a blog, and now you want me to run all this javascript??" -- some JS hater, probably.
I appreciate getting to choose as much as possible when code runs.
Somewhat ironically, Codepen ended up introducing the JS execution requirement to view the content.
Wow, this is great!
I want to put some of them in my UIs.
I've often run into these unintentionally messing up my UIs!
These "dots appearing only while (not) focused" are known as "extinction illusions", namely
is "McAnany's type" [1], and is known as "Ninio's type" [2], according Akiyoshi Kitaoka's materials. (I have recreated them too few years ago [3][4], before getting to the source.)[1] https://www.psy.ritsumei.ac.jp/akitaoka/kieru3e.html#:~:text...
[2] https://www.psy.ritsumei.ac.jp/akitaoka/kieru3e.html#:~:text...
[3] https://codepen.io/myf/full/XjdmJy ( scintillation warning)
[4] https://codepen.io/myf/full/jMqoMW ( scintillation warning)
This is cool, but more as a demonstration of interesting CSS techniques than optical illusions in my opinion.
Also, interestingly, I seem to be able to force myself to "see through" all of these illusions except for induced gradients, which I can't stop seeing unless I cover part of the screen.
33 - color fan: There is another interesting optical illusion here: The fan seems to rotate faster when not directly looking at it.
These are all super dark, for some reason.
You have to actually run them. Otherwise, they're just a dark CodePen preview.
Why the extra step of having to click each one? Only a few of them are interactive.
Because codepens can run javascript. And if a page has 50 of them, it might make the page load time much longer. I know that all these examples are pure CSS, and maybe there is a setting in codepen to disable the "Run" button and automatically run it. Still, getting to decide is generally a better pattern than presuming that that's what the user wants, especially when the fact that the code is inside a codepen makes it explicitly not an integral function of the page. "I thought this was just a blog, and now you want me to run all this javascript??" -- some JS hater, probably.
I appreciate getting to choose as much as possible when code runs.
Somewhat ironically, Codepen ended up introducing the JS execution requirement to view the content.
Wow, this is great!
I want to put some of them in my UIs.
I've often run into these unintentionally messing up my UIs!