Creek

Because I'm guessing it would be obnoxious - rather than posting one of the SVG groups - If you care to check it out - some of them have path classes, some have ellipse classes - guessing there are rectangle classes, etc? Does MorphSVG just ignore - or not work with - everything OTHER than path classes? If so, then... what? And God I'm so hoping that, by going back and renaming each and every bit - as I'll now be animating each and every bit independently - that they all obey the position dictated by the parent SVG? If you care to remove the "hidden" bit in CSS, you can see that the paths are already in the correct positions to each other, relative to the parent SVG? If morphSVG moves them all around, then I'm screwed? And, in the cases where shading exists in one expression, but not in another - is there a quick workaround for animating to and from nothingness? ie There's three shadings in one, two in the next, three in the next, zero in the next? I'm definitely gonna repeatedly run into that hassle? Also, what if the two or three shading need to morph into one? Oh - and the reason for the morphing, as opposed to the opacity - is that I have eye movement, fin movement, and I thought it would look much smoother with morphSVG? But if I'm absolutely WRONG about that - if I'm using the wrong tool, PLEASE tell me? 'Cuz this isn't looking like much fun at all.

My guess is that this doesn't work because the groups aren't simple paths? But I have absolutely no idea? I promise that this is a situation where I can't "try harder" - because I thought I'd properly layered the SVG, and hiding the elements did provide the first expression - and I then supposed and hoped, based on the original pen, that the code would just make the hidden layers visible as it did whatever it might do with morphSVG? But that didn't happen, and there are now literally UNLIMITED numbers of things I might have done wrong? Basically, beyond creating the proper groupings in Illustrator - I don't really have very much understanding of SVG or Javascript or MorphSVG. I just have various eye expressions and I've dropped them in to the fork of MorphSVG - sequence, just to see what might possibly happen? And then hopefully continue learning more? Instead - nothing happens at all? I have completed quite a few lessons on creativecodingclub, even completed the suggested JavaScript intro course on SkillShare. I absolutely don't wish to be pestering anyone whatsoever - but I very honestly don't know how to go about learning what it is I need to know to be able to do this? So THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH for ANY possible guidance! Oh, and the "morphing" between the various "expressions" is just completely random, not correctly ordered between keyframes - again, just to hopefully see what might happen. Just playing around at this point. Also, if anyone's willing to help? Please advise if, as I post Codepens here - if it's best to continue forking, so that I'm not editing the CodePen on which I requested help? Or is there some type of version control? Just thinking - if I didn't do that - any advice wouldn't be helpful to anyone checking it out later - if I just edited the original? Oh... and I might still screw up - but I'll try to follow any guidelines?

Exactly this. No, wait... sorry - this.exactly? Nope.... => Not this then? Or else! Completely an aside - but it's funny to me that every JavaScript Introductory course relates that Javascript is NOT Java. As if I know what Java is? And then they explain how Javascript is now its own programming language. It's apparently very exciting! Possibly being too honest - again, just tossing out my noob experience - I'm quite certain I probably should care, but I don't. And what makes GSAP so incredibly appealing is that I don't need my PhD in Javascript. Just that very little bit immediately pulls me out of a major tailspin. Again, if this is of the slightest interest to anyone other than myself - I'm still in the middle of just "exploring" everything. And, given I'm not migrating from an older version - I suddenly NOW read that as "Oh - I can read the Migration guide and then I can possibly understand older forum posts." And they suddenly now have value - because So, again again - THANK YOU!!!!!

Simply just coming at this as a complete noob, all of the old stuff is "outdated" in that I make the poor assumption that there's now a better "new" way? Whenever I even run across code for the previous version, I just assume it's outdated? For instance, if I have a problem with my computer and run across a solution where someone supplies a terminal command, I MIGHT give it a shot if I can't find a more "current" solution? But I basically have little to no faith that it'll actually work. There's probably already a guide on here - or even just the basic familiarity - that allows most folks to just naturally understand how old GSAP code and the new GSAP go hand in hand? But, again - just tossing my idiocy out there - we try to steer clear of old HTML code like floats, etc. - because we now have Flexbox and Grid, etc? So my initial assumption is that old code is pretty much all archaic? As I'm learning, I pretty much always append the current year when searching for info - not within Greensock's forums so much, but definitely on Google, YouTube, etc? Everything's been moving so quickly that - again - I just make the poor assumption that the vast majority of old code is likely only going to throw me for a loop?

THANK YOU!!! Definitely looking forward to the experience!

I greatly apologize - absolutely brand new, haven't even dipped my toes into GSAP yet - But, in hunting info as questions pop up in my head, there's often mentions of older GSAP and the current version? As in this feature doesn't "currently" work, but it will likely work with the new version? I doubt that linked quite correctly - but Jack responds in the linked thread that the logic behind viewport units creates issues for whatever various reasons? I'm not pretending to understand what it is he's communicating? EDIT: I've tossed an "x" in here to the shareable link with his direct reply: xhttps://greensock.com/forums/topic/18252-prevent-gsap-from-transforming-my-transforms-into-matrix/?tab=comments#comment-84205 But say you have an svg centered in the viewport or a grid area, and wish to move it around - pixels aren't very helpful, because the object's size is relative. So I was just wondering if the current version of GSAP work with these units - rather than 300px to the right, possibly 20vw or 20%? If so, is there possibly a codepen where these units are being used rather than pixels for at least some of the basics - scaling, moving - where I could possibly play around with it by resizing the viewport and see what the effect might be? Also, to see how I might implement those units within the script, if different than the x and the y pixel units? Just very much hoping GSAP is as easy to use once I shed the pixels? And, if there are some calculations for movement in a 2D space, hopefully someone might offer up how that would work instead - where some other javascript maybe quickly measures the container and then fills in the variables or whatnot? Again, talking way over my head. 1fr might be 650px or 500px or whatever, clamped at 300px and 900px? I have no clue - but I'm pretty sure x and y in pixels won't work too well with the relative animation? Thanks very much for any help!