"You shouldn't use either Lottie or Rive for static animations."
I guess that depends on your use case. If you only have this animation on your website, then probably no. But if you load and run the rive engine anyway, because you build a game with it - then why not also use it for "static animations", if the result can be way sharper?
I mean, that fundamentally misses the point of vector graphics, no?
I could also argue that a screenshot of a rendered SVG icon takes no heap or runtime, which would also completely miss the point of why a designer would want vector icons. JPGs and MP4s alike are not infinitely scalable.
Yeah, that’s correct. SVG is not a good delivery format, I agree. It is an excellent intermediate format, like a ProRes encoded video is.
It’s tough. We’re chatting on a website with no graphics besides a low resolution letter Y logo. The most exciting UX development maybe ever in the history of computing is a chat interface. On mobile, it’s all scrolling through rectangles. It’s not looking good for the designers.
I'm excited about this. As that post explains, it's very hard to have anything beyond basic interactivity with a lottie animation. It looks like Rive provides much more facility for interactivity. Also if it works I can cancel my Adobe subscription.
The animation of the walking bird is 246kB MP4. Bigger than Rive, sure, but it essentially takes no heap or runtime, which is at least 195kB of WASM.
The walking bird animation could probably be optimized much further through automatic decisions that the encoders can take.
You shouldn't use either Lottie or Rive for static animations.