Resizable screen capture
bimlas last edited by Pesala
It would be good to have a resizable screen capture (screenshot) tool for example as GIMP has (moving the mouse near the bottom edge shows a rectangle, drag to move the lower edge of the selection):
ozoratsubasa last edited by
I agree. It's better than create a new area, mainly when you are looking a specific size to do the screenshot, because you can change the size till you find what you looking for.
LonM last edited by
The solution might be easy if it involved this: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/resize
But I imagine it would probably end up needing a lot of work.
bimlas last edited by bimlas
@lonm Good catch, but I think the default event listeners overriding it (
mouseup) plus I tried to add
resize: both, but the "resize indicator" did not shown.
Besides this I don't think this could be a real solution: the bottom and right edge can be moved but the top and left does not.
Well, OK, all of the edges are moving but the center is fix, so it could be hard to precisely select the desired area.
In my opinion this is overkill. Just make the selection again.
If you want this level of sophistication use a dedicated screen capture program like FastStone Capture. Even the last freeware version 5.3 has more features than most users will need — capture the same area as last time, annotation, lines, arrows, etc.
If you're not using Windows, you will need to find another program, but the benefit is that it can capture screen shots from any program, not just from Vivaldi.
LonM last edited by
@pesala I wouldn't say overkill. I'd call it polish. In most other programs where you can make a rectangular selection, the selection box is sizeable after being created. I think it makes sense to include here.
Now this is absolutely a low-priority issue for me, and I'm always torn as to whether I should vote on FRs that are polish rather than something brand new and shiny.
bimlas last edited by
Anyway: feature requests are about adding new behavioural "extensions" OR imporving current ones. I think most of the users don't want to install additional software just to take a screenshot from a website: Vivaldi has the ability to take screenshots, but it has a very basic knowledge. This FR is about making it more usefull.
To be frank, it has to be an "upper limit" of the feature, for example I can imagine that users would like to upload the screenshot to Imgur from the menu, or draw on it, make it grayscale and so on. So basically I understand your opinion and I'm agree with it, but this feature is small enough to implement.
Catweazle last edited by
It is good that Vivaldi includes a screen capture function, but as always happens with extensions or screenshot functions in a browser, its use is limited to always using it in combination with the browser.
For this reason, just like @Pesala, I prefer a desktop grabber, much more complete and with more functionality than any Vivaldi function can have.
I use ShareX, an Open Source program, which allows me not only to do all kinds of image captures, but also in video, gif, QR code and text (OCR), apart from including a complete editor and the ability to upload the captures to the corresponding hosts and imagesharer.
I'm always torn as to whether I should vote on FRs that are polish rather than something brand new and shiny
It depends on a couple of factors:
- How much work would it take? If probably very little, then the polish is worthwhile. For example: Show Current Version on Updates Tab. It is not necessary as one can find the info easily on Help, About.
- How easy is it to work around? In this case, very easy. Either take more care the first time, or select the area again (one does not even have to cancel the current selection). If one needs pixel level precision, then open the screen capture in an image program to crop it, or use aforesaid dedicated programs.
Seasonly last edited by Seasonly
I don't understand how screencapture is so depreciated. Today, when we search something, we assume to search media with media. I mean, the bar address allows to search with words but we can also search by others medias like images or even sounds... If sounds seems a far idea, the image search is not or shouldn't be. And that's why the tool should be so handy and transparent to use as the others : for instance, resizing an area avoids to precisely and boringly to manipulate your mouse or the screen capture interface (which is not so easy into Vivaldi's solution) ; I even think that the screen capture button should appear into the bar address. And according to this, the screen capture should call image search engine directly, probably this should be parametered to know which is the user's image search engine.
That's why I don't think that the screen capture feature is a low-priority problem. And if you need to use screencapture to illustrate something, you don't need a basic tool. In fact, considering the screen capture like this, means that the current vivaldi screen capture feature is useless : so few handy for image searching, so few useful for quoting that you prefer downloading an extension.
If I want to capture a long web page, however, Vivaldi's screen capture is much faster and more reliable than FastStone, although it is limited to 30,000 pixels.
Seasonly last edited by
And what about privacy information about your bookmarks without blurring for instance ? I mean that's all this stuff, blurring, arrows... is not a luxe today, it's needed to point precisely what is the aim of the screen capture image, without to spread over internet your personal information.
When I make images for my messages, (the english is not my native language) the image quoted with arrows, flashing rectangle is an helpful tool to explain myself.
Screen capture shouldn' be a leak for security even for the beginner users.
Should you have a look to the new opera screencapture tool ?
For the screen capture of all the page, indeed vivaldi is handy, I even wonder if it is not the main aim of the screen capture development into vivaldi's team : the selection part is not placed in foreground whereas it's seems to me more useful than the all-page menu.