Scaling down makes images too blurry compared.

  • 2
  • Question
  • Updated 6 months ago
I write a lot of documentation. I need to automatically scale down the screenshots. Unfortunately, Snagit does not do this well. The feature to scale down makes the images so blurry that it is unusable. Instead, I take the full screenshot, I copy it to PowerPoint, Resize, Take another screenshot in Snagit and then paste it on my document.  Don't believe me? the top image is the one that is automatically produced by Snagit, the bottom one is the one I manually generate in PowerPoint. Which one do you think reads better? 

I wish Snagit would provide more settings so we can adjust the quality. It is too bad, but I have seen other posts similar to mine.  If someone has come up with a better idea, I am all for it.

Photo of ap

ap

  • 14 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes

Posted 7 months ago

  • 2
Photo of ap

ap

  • 14 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Here is a better example.

Photo of Ed Covney

Ed Covney

  • 1042 Posts
  • 524 Reply Likes
You took a "full screen" shot for PP, was it a "full screen" for snagit? What's the resolution of your monitor?
Photo of ap

ap

  • 14 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
I use the preset to automatically scale the image to 500px wide. This is perfect as all my images need to fit. If I take the full screen, and then scale down using the Snagit, I get the same result - blurry. If I instead take the full screen from Snagit and paste in PP, I can resize it and then take another screenshot using Snagit, and the result is much much better. 
Photo of Ed Covney

Ed Covney

  • 1042 Posts
  • 524 Reply Likes
How large (wide) is the pic you take to power point? When snagit grabs a picture, it's NOT a vector  graphic, i.e. it doesn't scale well. You'd be better off snagging a 1000px wide graphic then scale it down.

I'll put it another way, are you taking the 500px wide picture to power point?

Photo of ap

ap

  • 14 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Hi Ed, This is how I do it. Let me know if you know of a better way. 
https://www.screencast.com/t/4WMiN97LR
Photo of Ed Covney

Ed Covney

  • 1042 Posts
  • 524 Reply Likes
After further considerations, I tested reducing an 1107px wide (close to your 1098px wide original slide), but reduced them both to exactly 500 pixels wide. Can you tell a difference?

I can only conclude that when reduced sized in power point, you picked a reduction point that looked good, maybe 549px wide? (exactly 1/2 the originals width).

Original pic 1107px wide. Power point reduced to exactly 500px.




And Snagit's reduction to 500px



(Edited)
Photo of ap

ap

  • 14 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
HI Ed, BTW, thanks for going through all the this trouble. What would be your recommendation? As you saw on my video, I did not change the scaling in Power Point as I just simply mounted one screen on top of the other to show that is exactly the same dimension. If I want to make my process better, what should I do? 
Photo of Ed Covney

Ed Covney

  • 1042 Posts
  • 524 Reply Likes
It's kind of awkward, but you can reduce your PP version to exactly 500 pixels wide. Then you would be comparing apples to apples.

Where are you getting the slides from? Is there a more direct path than using Snagit? What is the natural resolution of your monitor(s), and at what resolution is Windows set at?

Where do you get the slides from? (on-line, local Excel, or ??) - I think your best outcome is working with the original graphic slide if possible. Can it be made exactly 1000 pixels wide? or 1500 or 500 pixels wide?
As the original was 1098px wide, try a snagit reduction to 549px - could you live with that?
(Edited)