Defined Edges With CSS3 Filter Blur

Question

I am blurring some images with this code

img {
  filter: blur(5px);
  -webkit-filter: blur(5px);
  -moz-filter: blur(5px);
  -o-filter: blur(5px);
  -ms-filter: blur(5px);
}

The edges of the image get blurred too though. Is it possible to blur the image, while keeping the edges defined? Like an inset blur or something?

Louvre

You can add a filter to remove transparency after the blur – Rentschler

Answer 1

You could put it in a <div> with overflow: hidden; and set the <img> to margin: -5px -10px -10px -5px;.

Demo:

Output

CSS

img {
    filter: blur(5px);
        -webkit-filter: blur(5px);
        -moz-filter: blur(5px);
        -o-filter: blur(5px);
        -ms-filter: blur(5px);
    margin: -5px -10px -10px -5px;
}

div {
    overflow: hidden;
}
​

HTML

<div><img src="http://placekitten.com/300" />​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​</div>​​​​​​​​​​​​

Seafarer

I just wrapped the img in a div with overflow:hidden and it worked. How is this possible? – Louvre

@Moppy That doesn't work in Chrome 23/OS X for me. I think the margin is required. – Seafarer

I don't understand how a div with overflow:hidden can help define the edges though? – Louvre

@Moppy Because the img is inside the div and it's blur is overflowing the boundaries of the div. The overflow: hidden; cuts it off. – Seafarer

What's with the junk at the bottom of the JSFiddle? I don't see why GA tracking a JSFiddle is necessary... – Inosculate

@Bojangles, the "junk" at the bottom of the picture in the jsfiddle is in the image itself. – Apply

Is there a way to do this for a background image? The idea is to create a blurred background image with text on it – Ionium

This was my approach as well, but in some cases the negative offsets were broken by adjacent elements. Setting z-index to a slightly higher level resolved the issue. – Deflective

This no longer works for me, OS X - El Capitan on Chrome or Safari (both latest versions). – Evelineevelinn

Works in Chrome, not in Firefox – Numbles

Works in chrome and safari on macos Sierra. No need to set the negative margins. Just overflow:hidden for the parent div is all that is required. – Epideictic

Note that placekitten no longer works, which is why the image doesn't show in the JSFiddle anymore - it's not an issue with the code. – Dittany

Answer 2

I was able to make this work with the

transform: scale(1.03);

Property applied on the image. For some reason, on Chrome, the other solutions provided wouldn't work if there was any relatively positioned parent element.

Check http://jsfiddle.net/ud5ya7jt/

This way the image will be slightly zoomed in by 3% and the edges will be cropped which shouldn't be a problem on a blurred image anyway. It worked well in my case because I was using a high res image as a background. Good luck!

Careen

this is nice and simple and adjustable. it works perfectly for my situation jsfiddle.net/ud5ya7jt/28 while some of the other solutions seem to fail now. – Inviting

Thank you very much for this, is exactly what I was looking for :) – Claudioclaudius

setting the parent with overflow: hidden will remove the scrollbars! thanks! – Stirps

Such a simple solution! – Ungodly

scale(1) does work but the 1.03 is so that we crop the image by 3% in order for the blurred edges to not be as easily noticeable – Hazeghi

Answer 3

I used -webkit-transform: translate3d(0, 0, 0); with overflow:hidden;.

DOM:

<div class="parent">
    <img class="child" src="http://placekitten.com/100" />
</div>

CSS:

.parent {
    width: 100px;
    height: 100px;
    overflow: hidden;
    -webkit-transform: translate3d(0, 0, 0);
}
.child {
    -webkit-filter: blur(10px);
}

DEMO: http://jsfiddle.net/DA5L4/18/

This technic works on Chrome34 and iOS7.1

Update

http://jsfiddle.net/DA5L4/50/

if you use latest version of Chrome, you don't need to use -webkit-transform: translate3d(0, 0, 0); hack. But it doesn't works on Safari(webkit).

Ange

@Razvan Cercelaru really? what version of safari did you check my demo? It works in Mac Safari 7. – Ange

Worked for me! Thanks! (Chromium 50.0.2661.86 (64-bit) OSX) – Boulder

Answer 4

Up-to-date answer (2024)

Use backdrop-filter instead! It blurs just like filter but without any edges, and without any compromises like resizing or scaling the image.

.blurred::after {
  content: "";
  position: absolute;
  width: 100%;
  height: 100%;
  backdrop-filter: blur(10px); /* apply the blur */
  pointer-events: none; /* make the overlay click-through */
}

.blurred {
  position: relative;
  width: 500px;
  height: 300px;
  background: no-repeat center center;
  background-image: url('https://besthqwallpapers.com/Uploads/26-5-2019/94041/thumb2-tesla-model-x-2019-exterior-front-view-new-gray-model-x.jpg');
  background-size: cover;
}

<div class="blurred"></div>

Keep in mind that this is not supported in IE and it only works in firefox if it is explicitly enabled.

Methanol

This is the correct way to do if you can have an ::after element. – Jecon

This needs another element to cover up the image, as <img> (and other replaced elements) cannot have pseudo :after selector. Works perfectly when the markup is right. – Etty

Answer 5

You can also keep the whole video, you do not have to cut something away.
You can overlay inset shadows over the white-blurred edges.

This looks really nice as well :)

Just paste this code to your videos' parent:

.parent {
    -webkit-box-shadow: inset 0 0 200px #000000;
       -moz-box-shadow: inset 0 0 200px #000000;
            box-shadow: inset 0 0 200px #000000;
}

Ride

Works a treat, none of the other suggestions helped. – Sparhawk

In my case, it helped, but it was still leaving some undesired blur, so I added an extra box shadow layer: box-shadow: inset 0 0 200px #000000, inset 0 0 200px #000000; – Steelman

Answer 6

In the many situations where the IMG can be made position:absolute, you can use clip to hide the blurred edges--and the outer DIV is unnecessary.

img {
    filter: blur(5px);
        -webkit-filter: blur(5px);
        -moz-filter: blur(5px);
        -o-filter: blur(5px);
        -ms-filter: blur(5px);
    position: absolute;
    clip: rect(5px,295px,295px;5px);
}

Mindamindanao

caniuse.com/#feat=css-clip-path here the browser support for clipping. IE is the best 😆 – Prologize

Answer 7

Having tackled this same problem myself today, I'd like to present a solution that (currently) works on the major browsers. Some of the other answers on this page did work once, but recent updates, whether it be browser or OS, have voided most/all of these answers.

The key is to place the image in a container, and to transform:scale that container out of it's overflow:hidden parent. Then, the blur gets applied to the img inside the container, instead of on the container itself.

Working Fiddle: https://jsfiddle.net/x2c6txk2/

HTML

<div class="container">
    <div class="img-holder">
        <img src="https://unsplash.it/500/300/?random">
    </div>
</div>

CSS

.container {
    width    : 90%;
    height   : 400px;
    margin   : 50px 5%;
    overflow : hidden;
    position : relative;
}

.img-holder {
    position  : absolute;
    left      : 0;
    top       : 0;
    bottom    : 0;
    right     : 0;
    transform : scale(1.2, 1.2);
}

.img-holder img {
    width          : 100%;
    height         : 100%;
    -webkit-filter : blur(15px);
    -moz-filter    : blur(15px);
    filter         : blur(15px);
}

Evelineevelinn

most aesthetically pleasing css code i've seen yet! – Faintheart

Answer 8

Insert the image inside a with position: relative; and overflow: hidden;

HTML

<div><img src="#"></div>

CSS

div {
    position: relative;
    overflow: hidden;
}
img {
    filter: blur(5px);
        -webkit-filter: blur(5px);
        -moz-filter: blur(5px);
        -o-filter: blur(5px);
        -ms-filter: blur(5px);
}

This also works on variable sizes elements, like dynamic div's.

Brunn

Answer 9

Just some hint to that accepted answer, if you are using position absolute, negative margins will not work, but you can still set the top, bottom, left and right to a negative value, and make the parent element overflow hidden.

The answer about adding clip to position absolute image has a problem if you don't know the image size.

Garrott

Answer 10

You can clip the image or the container, that way you can make sure nothing with overflow it.

div {
  clip-path=polygon(0 0,100% 0, 100% 100%, 0 100%);
}

You can apply it to the image or you can use path or inset instead of polygon

Unicameral

This is the best solution since it doesn't require wrapping the image in a div or an ::after pseudo-element. I use clip-path: inset(0); since it's more readable. – Varini

Agreed. Best solution when working with images without a wrapper. To preserve the border-radius use clip-path: inset(0 round 4px) – Leblanc

Answer 11

You can stop the image from overlapping it's edges by clipping the image and applying a wrapper element which sets the blur effect to 0 pixels. This is how it looks like:

HTML

<div id="wrapper">
  <div id="image"></div>
</div>

CSS

#wrapper {
  width: 1024px;
  height: 768px;

  border: 1px solid black;

  // 'blur(0px)' will prevent the wrapped image
  // from overlapping the border
  -webkit-filter: blur(0px);
  -moz-filter: blur(0px);
  -ms-filter: blur(0px);
  filter: blur(0px);
}

#wrapper #image {
  width: 1024px;
  height: 768px;

  background-image: url("../images/cats.jpg");
  background-size: cover;

  -webkit-filter: blur(10px);
  -moz-filter: blur(10px);
  -ms-filter: blur(10px);
  filter: blur(10px);

  // Position 'absolute' is needed for clipping
  position: absolute;
  clip: rect(0px, 1024px, 768px, 0px);
}

Kidney

Answer 12

The simplest way is just adding a transparent border to the div that contains the image and setting its display property to inline-block just like this:

CSS:

div{
margin: 2rem;
height: 100vh;
overflow: hidden;
display: inline-block;
border: 1px solid #00000000;
}

img {
-webkit-filter: blur(2rem);
filter: blur(2rem);
}

HTML

<div><img src='https://images.unsplash.com/photo-1557853197-aefb550b6fdc?ixlib=rb-1.2.1&ixid=eyJhcHBfaWQiOjEyMDd9&auto=format&fit=crop&w=375&q=80' /></div>

Here's a codepen depicting the same: https://codepen.io/arnavozil/pen/ExPYKNZ

Unscreened

Answer 13

If you are using background image, the best way I found is:

filter: blur(5px);
margin-top: -5px;
padding-bottom: 10px;
margin-left: -5px;
padding-right: 10px;

Robeson

This is actually a clever solution. I made that with percentage and added ie: width: 105%; – Replacement

Answer 14

If all fails, You can choose to block this issue with a box-shadow effect.

Here's an example based on the question:

img {
  filter: blur(5px);
  -webkit-filter: blur(5px);
  -moz-filter: blur(5px);
  -o-filter: blur(5px);
  -ms-filter: blur(5px);

  box-shadow: 0 0 5px 20px #333; // <= Or colour you like.
}

This is of course not the most pleasant solution, but it should work great in some cases.

Chinn

Answer 15

You can try adding the border on an other element:

DOM:

<div><img src="#" /></div>

CSS:

div {
   border: 1px solid black;
}
img {
    filter: blur(5px);
}

Preconize

Answer 16

I found that, in my case, I did not have to add a wrapper.

I just added -

margin: -1px;

or

margin: 1px; // any non-zero margin
overflow: hidden;

My blurred element was absolutely positioned.

Mimir

volkerotto.net/2014/07/03/… – Yseult

Answer 17

Here is a solution I came up with keeps 100% of the image and no crop is needed:

Basically I mirror tile the image in 3x3 grid then blur everything and then zoom in at the center image effectively creating like a repeat edges when blurring in after effects, it a bit strange that css3 don't have like a repeat edges built in.

Link to the method / code: How to blur an image using CSS3 without cropping or fading the edges?

Boltonia

While this link may answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes. – Emetic

Well yeah funny that you say that cause I just updated that post and title and that totally messed up the link here x) – Copeck