Adjust image DPI before saving / copying

  • 1
  • Idea
  • Updated 7 months ago
We mostly use SnagIt for documentation, and so our workflow is usually Capture -> Edit / Annotate -> Copy/Paste into Word (for formal documentation) or Outlook (for ad-hoc communications). The problem is that the DPI levels for screen captures are massively too low (typically 72 DPI) for print-oriented documents (we usually want 300 DPI - 600 DPI), and therefore every image insertion requires additional resizing and tweaking in Word or Outlook. Being able to quickly adjust this beforehand (preferably with toolbar icons preset to two or three different levels - we'd use it that much) would improve our efficiency by at least 15% here.
Photo of Erik Carlseen

Erik Carlseen

  • 8 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes

Posted 7 months ago

  • 1
Photo of Gary Coyne

Gary Coyne

  • 35 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
You do realize that when you make a screen capture, you are getting the number of pixels you get. Regardless of the tool you use (Word, Outlook, Photoshop, whatever) the new pixels will be invented pixels and from that your image will appear a bit "soft."

That may be acceptable to you and that's fine. Just do not think that if you are increasing the resolution from Snagit, you will be actually getting increased resolution. Snagit, like any other application will be inventing pixels. Just so you know (and you may already know all this).
Photo of Erik Carlseen

Erik Carlseen

  • 8 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Of course we realize this; that you only get as much image quality as you capture. That's not the point - workflow efficiency is. Applications make assumptions as best they can about what to do with images captured at particular resolutions, and when making the transition from screen to print those assumptions are almost universally wrong. At some point a manual adjustment must be made, and the best place to make them is in the application creating (or, in this case, capturing) the images. Adjusting images in Word sucks. Saving an image, opening it in another editor (like Photoshop or whatever) sucks even more. Applying a batch correction with shell-/command prompt-level tools like ImageMagick sucks less, but in most cases the images themselves never need to be saved as individual files - copy / paste is the optimum approach, and so batch correction still sucks.

I'm far from the first person to bring this up, but for some reason TechSmith keeps resisting the change. It would be good for them to consider that while many end-users do not understand the concept of physical pixel count vs. how those pixels are rendered in some output medium, they also have a substantial percentage of their users who are professionals in this area and would greatly benefit from an extremely small and simple addition. What's weird is that there were some update notes indicating this feature is available in the Windows version when capturing, but it doesn't seem to be on the Mac side. In any case, while having the option available during the capture would be handy, I think it makes more sense to change things like this in the editor so that a user can change their mind about the specifics of the output without having to go and capture again.
(Edited)
Photo of Gary Coyne

Gary Coyne

  • 35 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
OK, great. I HAD to bring up the issue of capture resolution and upscaling the resolution because too many people do not understand resolution. I'm sure you've encountered that yourself. But I had to ask.

Among the many things in life that suck you do seem to accept that batch operations are not as bad as individual operations, have you looked at "Image Processor" within Bridge (found from Tools -> Photoshop -> Image Processor. Bridge is a free download but the Image processor only works with Photoshop so if you do not have PS, ignore this suggestion. 

Now admittedly this will only work on upscaling/downscaling to pixel sizes but if you want something like percentage based increases/decreases, you could create an Action and run that through the Batch processing option from within Bridge as well.

There are many professionals who use this (such as myself) where you have the excellent algorithms that PS provides in a quick batch operation. In fact, using this would be faster than doing them one-at-a-time from within Snagit.

Enjoy!
(Edited)