Pros of three.js

• Comprehensive 3D graphics library with extensive features
• Large, active community and extensive documentation
• Supports a wide range of 3D rendering techniques and effects

Cons of three.js

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity
• Larger file size, which may impact page load times
• Overkill for simple gradient animations

Code Comparison

three.js (3D scene setup):

const scene = new THREE.Scene();
const camera = new THREE.PerspectiveCamera(75, window.innerWidth / window.innerHeight, 0.1, 1000);
const renderer = new THREE.WebGLRenderer();
renderer.setSize(window.innerWidth, window.innerHeight);
document.body.appendChild(renderer.domElement);

granim.js (gradient animation setup):

var granimInstance = new Granim({
    element: '#canvas-basic',
    direction: 'left-right',
    isPausedWhenNotInView: true,
    states : {
        "default-state": {
            gradients: [
                ['#AA076B', '#61045F'],
                ['#02AAB0', '#00CDAC'],
                ['#DA22FF', '#9733EE']
            ]
        }
    }
});

three.js is a powerful 3D graphics library offering extensive capabilities for complex 3D scenes and animations. It's well-suited for advanced projects requiring detailed 3D rendering. granim.js, on the other hand, is a lightweight library specifically designed for creating fluid and interactive gradient animations. It's easier to use for simple gradient effects but lacks the 3D capabilities of three.js.

Pros of p5.js

• More comprehensive and versatile for creative coding and visual arts
• Larger community and ecosystem with extensive documentation and examples
• Supports a wide range of interactive and multimedia projects

Cons of p5.js

• Steeper learning curve for beginners compared to Granim.js
• Larger file size and potentially higher resource usage
• May be overkill for simple gradient animations

Code Comparison

p5.js:

function setup() {
  createCanvas(400, 400);
}

function draw() {
  background(220);
  ellipse(mouseX, mouseY, 50, 50);
}

Granim.js:

var granimInstance = new Granim({
  element: '#canvas-basic',
  direction: 'left-right',
  isPausedWhenNotInView: true,
  states : {
    "default-state": {
      gradients: [
        ['#ff9966', '#ff5e62'],
        ['#00F260', '#0575E6'],
        ['#e1eec3', '#f05053']
      ]
    }
  }
});

While p5.js offers a more comprehensive toolkit for creative coding, Granim.js provides a simpler and more focused solution for gradient animations. p5.js is better suited for complex interactive projects, while Granim.js excels in creating smooth, customizable gradients with minimal setup.

Pros of PixiJS

• More comprehensive and feature-rich, offering a complete 2D rendering engine
• Supports complex animations, sprites, and interactive graphics
• Larger community and ecosystem with extensive documentation and plugins

Cons of PixiJS

• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive feature set
• Larger file size, which may impact load times for simpler projects
• Potentially overkill for basic gradient animations

Code Comparison

Granim.js (creating a gradient animation):

var granimInstance = new Granim({
    element: '#canvas-basic',
    direction: 'left-right',
    isPausedWhenNotInView: true,
    states : {
        "default-state": {
            gradients: [
                ['#AA076B', '#61045F'],
                ['#02AAB0', '#00CDAC'],
                ['#DA22FF', '#9733EE']
            ]
        }
    }
});

PixiJS (creating a simple gradient):

const app = new PIXI.Application();
document.body.appendChild(app.view);

const geometry = new PIXI.Geometry()
    .addAttribute('aVertexPosition', [-100, -100, 100, -100, 100, 100, -100, 100], 2)
    .addAttribute('aUvs', [0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1], 2)
    .addIndex([0, 1, 2, 0, 2, 3]);

const shader = PIXI.Shader.from(`
    varying vec2 vUvs;
    void main() {
        vUvs = aUvs;
        gl_Position = vec4(aVertexPosition, 0.0, 1.0);
    }`,
    `varying vec2 vUvs;
    void main() {
        gl_FragColor = vec4(vUvs.x, vUvs.y, 0.0, 1.0);
    }
`);

const quad = new PIXI.Mesh(geometry, shader);
app.stage.addChild(quad);

Pros of EaselJS

• More comprehensive and feature-rich, offering a full suite of tools for creating interactive graphics and animations
• Better suited for complex projects and game development
• Larger community and ecosystem, with more resources and support available

Cons of EaselJS

• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive feature set
• Larger file size, which may impact load times and performance for simpler projects
• More complex setup and configuration compared to Granim.js

Code Comparison

EaselJS:

var stage = new createjs.Stage("canvas");
var circle = new createjs.Shape();
circle.graphics.beginFill("red").drawCircle(0, 0, 50);
circle.x = 100;
circle.y = 100;
stage.addChild(circle);

Granim.js:

var granimInstance = new Granim({
    element: '#canvas',
    direction: 'left-right',
    isPausedWhenNotInView: true,
    states : {
        "default-state": {
            gradients: [
                ['#834D9B', '#D04ED6'],
                ['#1CD8D2', '#93EDC7']
            ]
        }
    }
});

This comparison highlights the differences in complexity and focus between EaselJS and Granim.js. EaselJS provides more control and flexibility for creating complex graphics and animations, while Granim.js offers a simpler approach specifically for gradient animations.

Pros of Fabric.js

• More comprehensive and feature-rich canvas library
• Supports complex object manipulation and interactive elements
• Extensive documentation and large community support

Cons of Fabric.js

• Larger file size and potentially heavier performance impact
• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive feature set

Code Comparison

Granim.js (creating a gradient animation):

var granimInstance = new Granim({
    element: '#canvas-basic',
    direction: 'left-right',
    isPausedWhenNotInView: true,
    states : {
        "default-state": {
            gradients: [
                ['#AA076B', '#61045F'],
                ['#02AAB0', '#00CDAC'],
                ['#DA22FF', '#9733EE']
            ]
        }
    }
});

Fabric.js (creating and manipulating objects on canvas):

var canvas = new fabric.Canvas('canvas');
var rect = new fabric.Rect({
  left: 100,
  top: 100,
  fill: 'red',
  width: 20,
  height: 20
});
canvas.add(rect);

While Granim.js focuses specifically on gradient animations, Fabric.js provides a more comprehensive set of tools for canvas manipulation and object creation. Fabric.js offers greater flexibility but may be overkill for simple gradient effects.

Pros of Paper.js

• More comprehensive and feature-rich library for vector graphics and animation
• Supports both canvas and SVG rendering
• Offers a powerful scripting environment with object-oriented programming

Cons of Paper.js

• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive API and features
• Larger file size, which may impact load times for simpler projects
• May be overkill for basic gradient animations or effects

Code Comparison

Paper.js example:

paper.install(window);
window.onload = function() {
    paper.setup('myCanvas');
    var path = new Path.Circle({
        center: view.center,
        radius: 30,
        fillColor: 'red'
    });
}

Granim.js example:

var granimInstance = new Granim({
    element: '#canvas-basic',
    direction: 'left-right',
    isPausedWhenNotInView: true,
    states : {
        "default-state": {
            gradients: [
                ['#AA076B', '#61045F'],
                ['#02AAB0', '#00CDAC']
            ]
        }
    }
});

Paper.js is better suited for complex vector graphics and interactive animations, while Granim.js excels at creating simple, performant gradient animations with minimal setup.