Links on captures

  • 2
  • Question
  • Updated 1 month ago
I capture a lot of material for school with embedded links for reference material.   Is that something that is an option to have links work?
Photo of twillrick

twillrick

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 1 month ago

  • 2
Photo of jcthewizard

jcthewizard

  • 15 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes

Snagit did provide the ability to capture url’s from links on the captured documents until version 12.  In my past I was an ‘expert witness’ and I used that feature often when doing legal research and preparation as the links provided detailed proof as to what the web site shared with others and it could be proven if the links changed to another source, of perhaps to another web site that was not allowed to be connected to the original web sites company.

I asked Techsmith if they would restore that feature and they claim their customers had no need for it and so they choose not to support it any longer.  Instead they encouraged me to go back to version 12 which does not capture scrolling web pages as well as version 18 and 19 do.  Such a shame.





Photo of Jay.Cummings

Jay.Cummings

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
We definitely need this feature!!!
Photo of Paul

Paul

  • 1625 Posts
  • 1200 Reply Likes
Links are separate items that are applied as a separate attribute to an image in the source and target locations.  They are not an inherent part of the image itself.

If your sources is a web page, you could expose the URL by turning on Capture Information effect, copying the URL from the browser address bar and applying it as custom text, as shown below, but the URL is not linked and is therefore not clickable



If the source is not a webpage you could use the same technique to cite the source

Or perhaps I have misunderstood your question?
Photo of Jay.Cummings

Jay.Cummings

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Clickable links for URLs and embeded links would be extremely valuable!
Photo of Rick Stone

Rick Stone

  • 5293 Posts
  • 2502 Reply Likes
If memory serves, the ability to have links from an image was also related to the image being saved in a SWF format. And Steve Jobs effectively killed that format in favor of HTML 5.
Photo of Jay.Cummings

Jay.Cummings

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
It would surly be great if there is an option for SnagIt to overcome any technical format limitations.  
Photo of Rick Stone

Rick Stone

  • 5293 Posts
  • 2502 Reply Likes
I suppose that technically they could. But what it would require is for SnagIt to save out some HTML and JavaScript in addition to the image.

When things were in SWF format it was simple. You just spat out a SWF, then you could upload the SWF to your web site and you were done.

But making it happen with HTML and JavaScript complicates things considerably. In order to do that, the scripting and HTML code has to be maintained so it works in all browsers. Then you have the compounded issue of users being befuddled because they no longer have a single file to upload and use. 

Based on that, I can see where TechSmith would maybe be a bit on the reluctant side to enter that arena because it opens a bit of a can of worms.

Of course only TechSmith can say for sure whether it's something that would be on their radar. 

Cheers... Rick :)
Photo of Paul

Paul

  • 1625 Posts
  • 1200 Reply Likes
Not to mention that any image that came with an HTML and javascript payload would be treated as a virus by most computer systems :)

Realistically, it's never going to happen - the technical challenges are disproportionate to the benefit.
Photo of jcthewizard

jcthewizard

  • 15 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Rick Stone: In the past (for me ver 9 through 12) obvious links; text and embedded url's, as well as url's associated with graphics, were maintained in a 'save as' PDF.  That technology exists.  Considering that flash is diminishing in use and that some url's are treated as a virus (as Paul wrote) are two different issues; URL's considered as a virus are usually controlled with your virus protection.  IF 'my job' were to document what url's a web page is pointing to, I would set that tolerance high so as to allow capture.  If some objects (i.e., graphics) use unreadable url's, so be it.  I would MUCH rather be able to capture as many URL's as possible, instead of none at all.
Photo of Rick Stone

Rick Stone

  • 5293 Posts
  • 2502 Reply Likes
Hi there

Apologies, but I'm not sure I fully comprehend and understand this statement:

In the past (for me ver 9 through 12) obvious links; text and embedded url's, as well as url's associated with graphics, were maintained in a 'save as' PDF.  

Care to expound on that?

Are you perhaps saying that you used the older feature to add hotspots to the image and instead of saving as SWF, saved to PDF instead? Assuming so, I believe it's likely that the SWF one would normally get would simply be embedded inside the PDF. And ultimately, I suppose it really doesn't matter exactly how it worked behind the scenes, only that something was produced that allowed you to click and visit one or more URLs?

Additionally, what seems confusing to me is mentioning capturing URLs. When I think of SnagIt, I tend to think of capturing images. I do understand that URLs can present pages that present images, but I'm having a disconnect in pondering how URLs would relate to a captured image. Unless, of course, it's something like we see on the facebook. Where an image is actually linked to a URL that presents the image and an associated news article.

Cheers... Rick :)
Photo of Paul

Paul

  • 1625 Posts
  • 1200 Reply Likes
Rick, I believe the OP needs to be able to cite the source of a capture and have that as a clickable link.

But every web app that I know requires you to specify the image and URL separately.  Facebook simply resolves the URL you give to the linked image on the site.