[HN Gopher] Show HN: Construct Animate - our new browser-based a...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Show HN: Construct Animate - our new browser-based animation tool
        
       Author : AshleysBrain
       Score  : 149 points
       Date   : 2023-03-08 10:17 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.construct.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.construct.net)
        
       | jckahn wrote:
       | https://artboard.studio/ is another excellent animation option
       | that's got a somewhat simpler UI.
        
         | ldenoue wrote:
         | You can also check ScreenRun to create beautiful videos from
         | screenshots or recordings in seconds https://screenrun.app/
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | flanbiscuit wrote:
       | This looks really nice.
       | 
       | I'm reminded of a desktop app Google has called "Google Web
       | Designer" which can do similar timeline based animations and
       | exports to the same formats. But it's nice being able to do in
       | the browser without downloading an app. However, Web Designer is
       | free so there's that. Also, who knows how long Google will
       | continue to support this app.
       | 
       | https://webdesigner.withgoogle.com/
        
       | mdorazio wrote:
       | Does it support importing svg files?
       | 
       | As others have mentioned, the workflow looks a lot like the old
       | days of Flash, which I really miss. I'll definitely be giving
       | this a try for future projects.
        
         | wraptile wrote:
         | Only for paid plans by the looks of it [1]
         | 
         | It took a while to figure it out as you can create a SVG object
         | but can't import a file and there's nothing matching "import"
         | in the docs.
         | 
         | What a weird decision. Testing the software whether it would
         | correctly work with my assets is probably the most important
         | purpose of the trial version.
         | 
         | edit: I've been corrected below
         | 
         | 1 - https://www.construct.net/en/animation-
         | software/manual/proje...
        
           | AshleysBrain wrote:
           | You can import SVG files to the project and display them with
           | the SVG Picture object, and that all works in the free
           | edition.
        
             | wraptile wrote:
             | Awesome, thanks for the correction. I see how it works
             | right now. For the lazy: right click on "Files" on the
             | right, select import and import your file, double click
             | canvas and create SVG object, then the imported SVG can be
             | selected in a dropdown on the left.
        
       | porkradish wrote:
       | This looks like a really nice tool. Would you consider a "Family"
       | plan level of pricing? I have two children (12yrs and 15yrs) who
       | love following Youtube animators and doing a large amount of art
       | and animation themselves. The personal plan is too restrictive
       | for them (layers being one major limit). Watermarks/logos in the
       | final rendered content is fine as this is all non-commercial. I
       | would have no problems supporting at ~$10 a month for something
       | that fit a case like this. Thanks!
        
         | TomGullen wrote:
         | Drop us an email at support@construct.net and we'll help you
         | out
        
       | noduerme wrote:
       | What's this built in? The whole GUI looks like a Windows
       | application.
        
         | TomGullen wrote:
         | This is all written from the ground up in house.
        
           | mikelovenotwar wrote:
           | That doesn't answer the question.
        
             | AshleysBrain wrote:
             | It's browser-based so it's all HTML, CSS and JavaScript,
             | written using our own in-house framework.
        
               | noduerme wrote:
               | The windowing / panels / dropdowns / UI components look
               | really nice. Like, almost a whole desktop program. I was
               | just wondering what UI framework you were using. All in
               | house, awesome.
               | 
               | [edit] Sorry, was the UI for the Construct actually built
               | using Construct? Do you guys use PixiJS or anything like
               | that as an underlying engine?
        
               | AshleysBrain wrote:
               | Thanks, we were aiming to make a desktop-grade UI in the
               | browser and it's nice to hear feedback like that!
               | 
               | The UI was separately developed with JavaScript, it
               | wasn't made in Construct itself (which is mostly canvas-
               | based). The whole runtime is also in-house - we don't use
               | PixiJS or any other libraries, once again it's all our
               | own in-house engine, custom WebGL/WebGPU renderer, etc.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | I love how not using some sort of JS framework/library is
               | confusing people! I for one appreciate the fact that you
               | are not for multiple reasons.
        
       | dhumph wrote:
       | Can you describe how it's different/better than something like
       | svgator?
       | 
       | Also, i just went to create a new project: 2 things immediately
       | were a problem 1. the modal didn't have differentiation between
       | primary button color and secondary. I clicked cancel 2. after
       | clicking create it took >30+ seconds and there was no indication
       | that something was happening.
       | 
       | I look forward to checking it out more!
        
         | Springtime wrote:
         | Surprised I hadn't heard of SVGator before, since I've posted
         | about a lack of SVG native animation authoring tools in the
         | past. Appears to have an option to use either CSS-based
         | animations or JS-based (curious it appears to lack a native
         | SMIL option which would offer various things the JS-based
         | option supports and benefit most from authoring tools).
         | 
         | On topic: remarkably the Construct Animate editor/demo works
         | even without cookies/web storage enabled. Nice :)
        
       | bisRepetita wrote:
       | Thanks for sharing this.
       | 
       | If I wanted to use one of those animations as overlay on a video
       | I have (with transparency), what export would you recommend?
       | Based on your intro video, is seems it would be a series of PNG,
       | or is there some other option?
        
         | AshleysBrain wrote:
         | If your video editing tool can use an image sequence (e.g.
         | 000.png, 001.png...), I'd recommend using the Image Sequence
         | exporter[1]. If you want an actual video file with
         | transparency, you can do that by using FFmpeg to encode a video
         | from the image sequence, which we also have a guide for[2].
         | 
         | [1] https://www.construct.net/en/tutorials/exporting-image-
         | seque...
         | 
         | [2] https://www.construct.net/en/tutorials/exporting-videos-
         | tran...
        
           | bisRepetita wrote:
           | Thank you!
        
       | arbitrandomuser wrote:
       | motioncanvas seems like a nice open source alternative , although
       | motioncanvas relies almost completely on JS to draw and animate
       | https://motioncanvas.io/
        
       | wiradikusuma wrote:
       | Another nascent tool is Rive ( https://rive.app/ ). It claims to
       | produce smaller output than Lottie ( https://lottiefiles.com/ ),
       | which itself another animation container(?)--imagine .SWF for
       | Flash.
        
       | seanalltogether wrote:
       | I cut my teeth as a programmer using Shockwave and Flash back in
       | the day, so I'll always be happy to see that kind of IDE live on
       | for others, even if I would no longer use it.
        
       | andrewstuart wrote:
       | I can recommend you check out the games development tools from
       | this company.
        
         | exodust wrote:
         | On the other hand, they're subscription only. It used to be
         | better, back in Construct 2 days, sensible flexible pricing.
         | 
         | Then they changed it to browser based, subscription only,
         | Chrome only. The whole thing becomes read-only the moment your
         | credit card stops drip-feeding the subscription.
         | 
         | When you poke around in these tools on the weekend, the
         | subscription model falls flat. Being billed for "time" that
         | happens to fall between my use of these products, is a bizarre
         | way to charge customers for software. I get that if I rented a
         | lawnmower, I'm paying for every day I have that mower because
         | other customers want that same mower.
        
           | TomGullen wrote:
           | Construct 3 and Construct Animate are not Chrome only, it
           | works in all major browser and even mobile/tablet devices.
           | Chromebook support has been a major plus for us in the
           | educational market.
           | 
           | Construct 2 was pay once, but we found after a few years
           | sales really plateaued. Going to SaaS was a difficult
           | transition for us, but it's worked out well and we now see
           | year on year growth which gives us a lot more breathing room.
           | 
           | I think it's important to also recognise that pay once
           | software just doesn't work as a model for a lot of countries
           | around the world. As an example, for Construct 3 we charge
           | the equivalent of ~$12 USD per year in Malawi which makes it
           | a very affordable option, whereas a one-off price would have
           | to be roughly quadruple that for it to be economical for us,
           | and would likely put it out of reach of a lot of people who
           | otherwise may of paid annually for it.
           | 
           | SaaS puts more onus on us to cater for our current paying
           | customers, before with pay once our focus was weighted on
           | acquiring new customers. To what extent this actually plays
           | out is kind of tricky to put your finger on especially from
           | where I'm sitting but there is certainly an element of this
           | in our work.
           | 
           | I'm not going to pretend that SaaS is suitable for everyone
           | and every product and I understand why people are adverse,
           | but for us it's worked well and a lot of noisy predictions
           | from some of our customer base about this being our downfall
           | never played out. The transition to pay once to SaaS was a
           | vulnerable time for our business and a very interesting one
           | at that.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | nico wrote:
       | Awesome. A lot of people miss Flash and all the cool things about
       | it. Great work!
        
         | robertoandred wrote:
         | The Flash IDE still exists, it's called Adobe Animate now.
        
           | nogridbag wrote:
           | I can't speak for everyone here, but I would imagine the
           | majority of people creating Flash content back in the day
           | were using some warez version. For me personally, I was a
           | teenager and my parents had no idea what I was doing on the
           | PC. I believe I started with Macromedia Flash 2 or 3. I just
           | wanted to animate something on the screen for the same reason
           | most of us started programming - that feeling of being able
           | to instruct the computer to do something and see it come to
           | life. I used Flash for a while and even got a small job in
           | college creating a new Flash website. Even with all of those
           | memories I have zero interest in Adobe Animate because
           | animating things is not my career and I don't want yet
           | another monthly subscription. I like that Construct Animate
           | has a free plan, although the free tier seems too limited to
           | be useful.
        
       | thomasfromcdnjs wrote:
       | For anyone too lazy to look into it. From my view it looks like
       | Macromedia Flash 2004 or something. Which I love! Might actually
       | check it out later.
        
       | 58x14 wrote:
       | Site hung for me (us-east) on the first few tries. Get ready for
       | the HN hug, Ashley!
       | 
       | I've never used any animation tools, and it's been on my list to
       | make a few basic logo animations in css/js. It's striking how
       | many features you guys have managed to ship in a webapp and I'll
       | definitely play with Construct Animate in the near future.
       | 
       | Also want to say that the tutorial/walkthrough is excellent, and
       | gave me a great impression of the core functionality in under a
       | minute. Without the walkthrough, I might spend the same ~30
       | seconds being unenthused about the UI elements, which others have
       | pointed out have a distinct mid-2000s appearance that I
       | personally don't care for.
       | 
       | Good job :)
        
         | TomGullen wrote:
         | Tom here from Construct, spent a lot of time recently working
         | on improving reliability/scalability of website so when I see
         | comments like this always sends a pang of fear through me :)
         | 
         | Site resources looks to be coping just fine which is great (we
         | often get upwards of 20 pageviews per second on our site at
         | peak times) so will put this down as a blip.
         | 
         | Look forward to hearing more about how you get on with Animate,
         | Ashley and Diego have done a stellar job in getting
         | productivity software running in the browser!
        
           | 58x14 wrote:
           | Sorry, didn't mean to ring any bells - but hey, you've made
           | #1, so hopefully a little heads' up was helpful!
        
       | dutchbrit wrote:
       | Brings back good old Flash memories, good job!
        
         | rafamvc wrote:
         | Flash really got me hooked as a kid. It was easy enough to get
         | started and had enough depth with their scripting language that
         | got me to start to learn programming.
         | 
         | I still remember the demo flash animation to this day.
         | 
         | I wish more web products enabled a one kid show to get
         | something done that wows adults.
         | 
         | Web dev today is a messy onion of poor abstractions that you
         | need to know too much to get a little done.
        
         | napolux wrote:
         | Same, I used to make flash games back in the days and even
         | ventured into Adobe AIR :)
        
       | nogridbag wrote:
       | I used to love Flash as a kid. I just tried this out and ran into
       | a few snags. I completed the mini tutorial which was pretty slick
       | and clicked "Menu -> Preview" and it just showed the first frame
       | of the animation (static pig). I was expecting a preview of the
       | animation. I then attempted to export a gif and got a hard error.
       | "Oops! Something went wrong." Standard MacBook 15" using
       | Chrome/Ventura.
        
         | hummus_bae wrote:
         | [dead]
        
         | AshleysBrain wrote:
         | You need to change the 'Start on layout' property of the
         | timeline to make sure it plays in preview. I think our guided
         | tour should include that though, so I'll see about updating
         | that.
         | 
         | Not sure why that error happened when exporting a GIF - I just
         | tried it and it's working here (Chrome/Windows). Could you copy
         | and paste the error message and send it to me at
         | ashley@construct.net? I'll see if I can figure it out from
         | that.
        
           | nogridbag wrote:
           | That makes sense, thanks! Will send you the details
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-03-08 23:02 UTC)