 | Nov 8 2007 |
ROBBNASHVILLE I recently wrote to Marcel regarding SnapWeb & Leopard. He has shown incredible responsiveness and has made SnapWeb totally compatible with Leopard. SnapWeb can snap pages the others can't. Developers like this deserve the respect and the support of the Mac community.
(Version 4.0.1r1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Feb 21 2007 |
DON MORRIS Let me help out the author here, as from most of the other comments it appears he hasn't made his case for paying for this software when -- it is true -- there are other, free solutions for capturing a web page. Normally when I want to capture a web page, I simply print to PDF. As simple as that is, there are times when -- as neutralzone points out -- the PDF does not render properly or a stylesheet defines different styles for printed output. Also, Mac OS X's Save as PDF feature paginates the the output, something not generally suitable for web pages, unless you "first set up a sufficiently long custom paper size" (how long is that?). (Thanks to nga for pointing out the Export PDF command in Saft, which gives you an unpaginated PDF. I keep forgetting all of the incredibly useful features in this Safari plug-in.) Paparazzi is great for many people. Give it a URL, press Capture, and save the loaded web page as one of several image formats along with an optional thumbnail. What if you need to log into a web site to see a particular page, though? Here's where it gets a little tedious, because it is first necessary to browse to the page in Safari and authenticate, then load the page in Paparazi. SnapWeb, however, "has a full-featured browser interface for easy navigation without typing URLs," meaning you can navigate a web site without using another browser. Speaking of another browser, SnapWeb will capture the current Firefox page in addition to the current Safari page. Paparazzi will only capture from Safari. Also, SnapWeb supports opening of local HTML files through drag-and-drop, contextual "Open With", and a File > Open command. Paparazzi's four image formats (JPEG, PDF, PNG, TIFF) may be sufficient for many, but some people will want the additional formats that SnapWeb provides -- GIF and PSD -- and may like to save as HTML or text or even to the the clipboard. SnapWeb offers finer control over the image size. SnabWeb allows multiple windows. Images can be saved by SnapWeb in quick succession to a user-selected folder with incrementing filenames. And, with a professional license ($39.90), SnapWeb can be activated by AppleScript, a Services Menu item, or Unix shell scripts, for serious automation power. The only complaint I have with SnapWeb is actually the developer's claim of "exactly [sic] timing of animation and movie snapshots (e.g. web pages with Flash, WMV, Real or Quicktime)." In my tests, I could not rely on SnapWeb to capture the video frame I was viewing when I clicked Save. However, this is still an improvement over Paparazzi, which captures the web page only as it is first loaded, not at some point later when animation or video has changed. If you want a free alternative to saving web pages and don't need the features SnapWeb provides, then by all means use Paparazzi. Don't mistake SnapWeb as something that "does exactly the same," though: its additional features are well worth the price for someone that needs them.
(Version 4.0.1r1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Oct 23 2006 |
NICOLASD developer should be ashamed to charge for this when paparazzi is both free and better.
(Version 4.0r1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| May 17 2006 |
INKHEAD This application absolutely sucks. It's slow, and runs poorly, and you have to wait and wait. Download "Paparazzi!" here on macupdate.com, It's free, lets you save in any format you want, select resolution, and even set defaults for how the file gets name.. It's not a universal binary but EVEN in rosetta EMULATION IT RUNS FASTER than SnapWeb on my macbook pro Paparazzi, get it, it is free!
(Version 3.1r4) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Apr 22 2006 |
MIO not for nothing, but in Safari right click ( or control click ) and "Print Page...", as opposed to command + P will print the whole page in one piece - to your desktop as PDF for example ..........
(Version 3.1r3) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Apr 22 2006 |
NEUTRALZONE I save lots of web pages as PDF, but it doesn't always work. Some web pages create print output using a print-friendly CSS style sheet which means you do not get anything that looks like the screen. When that happens, it's better to take a bitmap screen shot. Also, some web pages render very badly to PDF, with misaligned layouts or controls (buttons etc). This is another case where a straight screen shot can be a more precise representation of the page. Basically I use either Safari Stand plug-in, which adds an "Export to PDF" context menu so you can bypass the Print dialog, or Paparazzi. What seems unnecessary? Paying for SnapWeb.
(Version 3.1r3) | |
Replies:
| Apr 16 2006 |
GMAX Ditto.
(Version 3.1r2) | |
 | Nov 14 2005 |
ANONYMOUS I won't downrate this because I don't understand the problem I'm having. I've tried SnapWeb, Paparazzi, and Shiira, and none of them will copy/save an image of anything but the first screen of the web pages I want to image, and none of them seems to have any provision or preference for specifying imaging of the whole page. They all open the URL just fine (better than Camino or Safari, actually) but the images they produce are all just screen shots. Could this be because I'm trying to save images of secure (https://) pages?
(Version 3.0r1) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Nov 15 2005 |
BOB Can you send us the URL you are trying? (The email adress is on our homepage.) | |
| Nov 14 2005 |
NGA you can't do ist w/ safari BUT you can do it w/ Saft plugin installed AND w/ Saft you gonna have more than just taking site-long screenshots. and it's less expensive
(Version 3.0r1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Nov 14 2005 |
MARTIN I usually don't want to spoil the income of fellow developers, but 18 Bucks ... as already mentioned: Paparazzi is much less expensive & does exactly the same (and never chrashed on me). See: http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/15966
(Version 3.0r1) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Nov 15 2005 |
BOB It does not exactly the same. SnapWeb has a much better Safari and system integration, AppleScript and the possibility to exactly time screenshots of animations.
(Version 3.0r1) | |
| Oct 10 2005 |
ANONYMOUS If you use Shiira you get always a paginated result. This is the exclusive feature of SnapWeb: It creates complete screenshots of web pages even if the users screen isnt large enough to show the whole page content at once. No pagination! You can't do this with Shiira, Safari or Preview.
(Version 2.0.1 r2) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Nov 14 2005 |
NGA you can't do ist w/ safari BUT you can do it w/ Saft plugin installed AND w/ Saft you gonna have more than just taking site-long screenshots.
(Version 3.0r1) | |
| Nov 14 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Actually, you can use Tiger's built-in Print to PDF function in the Print dialog box to capture an entire long web page, if you also set up a sufficiently long custom paper size in Page Setup.
(Version 3.0r1) | |
| Oct 10 2005 |
ANONYMOUS The exelent free browser Shiira does this for free.
(Version 2.0.1 r2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Jan 6 2005 |
ANONYMOUS Get this instead: Paparazzi - http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/15966 - it's based on a Unix tool, works as a stand-alone application (you don't have to be in Safari, you don't have to have any browser open), lets you see a preview of the page, and export it in PNG. It grabs the entire web page, no matter how long. Plus, it's FREE.
(Version 2.0 r1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Jul 22 2004 |
MISS.PRISS Great program! Better than "save as pdf". I tried "save as pdf" for a few weeks but I always had a bunch of blank pages in the middle of the file. Not a problem with SnapWeb. Thanks
(Version 2.0 r1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Jul 13 2004 |
ANONYMOUS good intention, developer! - but what if you want to save webpages that contain some FLASH-items?!.... the saved screenshot-jpeg contains anything BUT the flash-items! thats poor. and thats the major problem of this nice prog! maybe it`s impossible to save both kinds of images, (im not a technician) but nearly all webites of today contain .swf-material. sorry, for me the program only serves for semiprofessionals.
(Version 2.0 r1) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Jul 22 2004 |
INTOLERANT OF RUDE PEOPLE Oh, for heaven's sake - why are you so rude?! If this doesn't work for you then find something that does. Better yet, since you're a real Pro, why not develop "your very own software" with all the special features that you Pros require? Don't forget to post it here so we can comment on your hard work and generous contribution to the Mac community.
(Version 2.0 r1) | |
| Jul 6 2004 |
DTP I am sorry, but this software is overpriced joke! What you pay for this software here, could be done with out it! Or, with SnapNDrag, Constrictor etc.
(Version 2.0 r1) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Jul 7 2004 |
The main feature of SnapWeb is exactly what all these other applications can't do: Creating complete screenshots of web pages even if the users screen isn't large enough to show the whole page content at once.
(Version 2.0 r1) | |
| Aug 23 2003 |
TIM SnapWeb solves douzens on problems I had. A great product!
(Version 1.1r1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Aug 22 2003 |
ANONYMOUS Immediately crashes on EVERY attempt to load a web page. Running OS X 10.2.6. Sounds like a cool application, I just can't keep it from crashing within 5 seconds of trying to load a web page.
(Version 1.1r1) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Jul 22 2004 |
ANONYME Works great for me! Must be a conflict with some other third party product.
(Version 2.0 r1) | |
| Aug 21 2003 |
ANONYMOUS To the last Anonymous post: ... because with "Save as PDF" you are always "printing" on pages with a specific size! It is almost unpossible to fit a webpage readable on one sheet, you always get multiple pages. With SnapWeb you get single graphics which are containing the whole webpage in brilliant resolution - and PDF is just one option to save it!
(Version 1.0r1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Aug 18 2003 |
JOEL MUELLER Great idea, however the quality of even the "lostless" JPEG is really very poor. I tried saving the front page of MacUpdate using the highest quality JPEG format available in SnapWeb, and it was tremendously pixelated.
(Version 1.0r1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Aug 18 2003 |
ANONYMOUS Why do we need a shareware application for this? Just print the page and use "Save as PDF".
(Version 1.0r1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
|
Main
