Snipping Tool Alternatives


I'm very conservative when it comes to installing applications that have functionality similar to what is already available in Windows.
I know there are a number of third party screen capture applications that can do a better job than Snipping Tool can do, especially when it comes to annotations.

Do you use a third party screen capture application, or are you happy with Snipping Tool?
If you do use a third party screen capture application, which one do you prefer? 🤔
It is more a question of timing.

A few years ago, the snipping tool was pretty basic, so 3rd party tools with more functionality became popular with many.

However, now snipping tool has been developed, and for many suits their needs.

I have other tools but tbh I find snipping tool is now quite adequate since you could snip videos and audio.

There will always be a few who use or continue to use 3rd party tools but I suspect they are in the minority now.

Snipping tool is a bit weak with only freeform annotation.
Why on earth do MS think we are arty farty types using electronic pens etc.

There are lots of us who want to annotate with shapes and type text. If I freeform, the end result looks like it has been done by a drunken spider.

Fortunately, it is easy enough to annotate using paint, but it would be great for paint's key tools to be a direct feature in Snipping Tool.

MS do seem to have a blind spot when it comes to creativity, thinking we all sit round a campfire singing "ging gang gooley".

Come on MS, most people want to be able to produce quality presentations - not just items that look like a five year old's output.
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    Windows 11 Pro + Win11 Canary VM.
    Computer type
    Laptop
    Manufacturer/Model
    ASUS Zenbook 14
    CPU
    I9 13th gen i9-13900H 2.60 GHZ
    Motherboard
    Yep, Laptop has one.
    Memory
    16 GB soldered
    Graphics Card(s)
    Integrated Intel Iris XE
    Sound Card
    Realtek built in
    Monitor(s) Displays
    laptop OLED screen
    Screen Resolution
    2880x1800 touchscreen
    Hard Drives
    1 TB NVME SSD (only weakness is only one slot)
    PSU
    Internal + 65W thunderbolt USB4 charger
    Case
    Yep, got one
    Cooling
    Stella Artois (UK pint cans - 568 ml) - extra cost.
    Keyboard
    Built in UK keybd
    Mouse
    Bluetooth , wireless dongled, wired
    Internet Speed
    900 mbs (ethernet), wifi 6 typical 350-450 mb/s both up and down
    Browser
    Edge
    Antivirus
    Defender
    Other Info
    TPM 2.0, 2xUSB4 thunderbolt, 1xUsb3 (usb a), 1xUsb-c, hdmi out, 3.5 mm audio out/in combo, ASUS backlit trackpad (inc. switchable number pad)

    Macrium Reflect Home V8
    Office 365 Family (6 users each 1TB onedrive space)
    Hyper-V (a vm runs almost as fast as my older laptop)
If by Processing you mean... Enhancing/Denoising - then yes, you can put it like that.

.jpg is not a lossless format. But it's still a "digital" image format - which can be subjected to changes/enhancements. ....
Thanks for the info. It may be of some use to others but being I'm, a semi-pro photographer using Photoshop for many years, I'm well familiar with the different imaging formats, color profiles, and image sizes, and how they can affect image quality.

Not to mention you shot above image with a Nikon D850, which sure... it's a DSLR from 2017 - so a bit far from the latest and the greatest.
What are you talking about? And who said anything about anything being the latest and greatest???

Sorry, but your point here as has zero to do with the subject discussed. And whether the body is from 2017 or 2007 it still shoots images supported by today's photo-editing software, so.... 🤷‍♂️

Add for record, the D850 is still a relevant camera in 2024 and is still being produced and sold. And I got my D850 in 2020 ;-)

Furthermore, that image has enough light for a low ISO of 1000 to be used -
1-sec @ f/13, ISO 1000, Tripod mount. RAW file processed in Adobe Lightroom, finishing edits in Adobe Photoshop - both subscription based... (in case you need to assert the editor(s) were old as well). Master file is tiff saved in Pro Photo. Posted image is jpeg saved in sRGB ;-)

so the noise level should be quite minimal. Same image shot with a phone - you'd have a lot of internal cheating/enhancing - to get same level of noise.
....but, isn't that the point of using good gear and proper editing techniques??? 🤷‍♂️

Regardless, the point of the image was not to show off editing prowess or camera tech, but to convey the point that it could be the way the image was shot or photo editing technique, not the photo-editor (Photoshop) itself resulting in a, in this case, grainy image.

Not trying to be rude just addressing your comments.
 

My Computers

System One System Two

  • OS
    Windows 11 Pro 24H2 (Build 26100.3476)
    Computer type
    PC/Desktop
    Manufacturer/Model
    Custom built
    CPU
    Intel Core 9 Ultra
    Motherboard
    Gigabyte Aorus Z890 Xtreme AI Top
    Memory
    64G (4x16) DDR5 Corsair RGB Dominator Platinum (6400Mhz)
    Graphics Card(s)
    Radeon (XFX MERC 310) RX 7900XT
    Sound Card
    Onboard (ESS Sabre HiFi using Realtek drivers)
    Monitor(s) Displays
    27-inch Eizo Color Edge - CG2700X
    Screen Resolution
    3840 x 2160
    Hard Drives
    4 Samsung NVM 990 Pro drives: 1 X 1TB (OS) 2X TB, 1 X 1TB.
    PSU
    Seasonic TX-1300 (1300 Watts)
    Case
    Cooler Master H500M
    Cooling
    Corsair Link Titan 280 RX RGB
    Keyboard
    Logitech Craft
    Mouse
    Logitech MX Master 3
    Internet Speed
    1TB Download. 512mb Upload
    Browser
    Microsoft Edge Chromium
    Antivirus
    Windows Security
    Other Info
    System used for gaming, photography, music, school.
  • Operating System
    Windows 11 Pro 23H2 (Build 22631.4391)
    Computer type
    Laptop
    Manufacturer/Model
    Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon (Gen 12)
    CPU
    Intel Core Ultra 7 165U vPro® Processor
    Motherboard
    Vendor
    Memory
    32 GB LPDDR5X-6400MHz (Soldered)
    Graphics card(s)
    Intel Graphics
    Sound Card
    Onboard
    Monitor(s) Displays
    14" 2.8K OLED, Anti Reflection, Touch, HDR 500, 400 nits, 120Hz
    Screen Resolution
    2880 x 1800
    Hard Drives
    1 TB SSD M.2 2280 PCIe Gen4 Performance TLC Opal
    PSU
    Vendor
    Case
    Lenovo
    Cooling
    Vapor Chamber Cooling
    Mouse
    Touchpad: Haptic Touchpad
    Keyboard
    Backlit, Black with Fingerprint Reader and WWAN
    Internet Speed
    100MB
    Browser
    Edge Chromium
    Antivirus
    Windows Security
    Other Info
    202. Build Your Own laptop.
    vPro Certified Model: vPro Enterprise
There will always be a few who use or continue to use 3rd party tools but I suspect they are in the minority now.
Ummmmm..., I don't think so!
Come on MS, most people want to be able to produce quality presentations - not just items that look like a five year old's output.
And that's why we use 3rd party tools!!! 🤷‍♂️

7583.jpg

7583.jpg
 
Last edited:

My Computers

System One System Two

  • OS
    Windows 11
    Computer type
    PC/Desktop
    Manufacturer/Model
    ASUS ROG Strix
  • Operating System
    Windows 11
    Computer type
    Laptop
    Manufacturer/Model
    ASUS VivoBook
This is the extent of what you can accomplish with Snipping Tool. Very basic.

0007370.jpg
 

My Computers

System One System Two

  • OS
    Windows 11
    Computer type
    PC/Desktop
    Manufacturer/Model
    ASUS ROG Strix
  • Operating System
    Windows 11
    Computer type
    Laptop
    Manufacturer/Model
    ASUS VivoBook
What are you talking about? And who said anything about anything being the latest and greatest???

Sorry, but your point here as has zero to do with the subject discussed. And whether the body is from 2017 or 2007 it still shoots images supported by today's photo-editing software, so.... 🤷‍♂️

Add for record, the D850 is still a relevant camera in 2024 and is still being produced and sold. And I got my D850 in 2020 ;-)

You misunderstood that part, since the point i was making was more like - the other way around. I was the one who said - it's not the latest and the greatest - that being an obvious fact (7 years of advancements - translate to superior image stabilization, smarter & faster capturing capabilities). But STILL... upon release was a top tier camera (even priced quite high - among professional cameras - competing with mirrorless full-frame cameras) - which is still used by some professional to this days. And that's just it (my point) - was saying that... sure, can't compete with the greatest and the latest - but still capable of exceptional results, especially under good light conditions - while having a bigger sensor and using only 1000 ISO.

1-sec @ f/13, ISO 1000, Tripod mount. RAW file processed in Adobe Lightroom, finishing edits in Adobe Photoshop - both subscription based... (in case you need to assert the editor(s) were old as well). Master file is tiff saved in Pro Photo. Posted image is jpeg saved in sRGB ;-)

Again, that was just my point. To many favorable conditions - for that to be possible. If you had a random photo from mainstream camera released back in 2014 - still capable of shooting in RAW (so you have some room to work with) - the limitations and noise would be so apparent - that the processing part would involve a lot of retouching (inserting fake details - to improve the image). And thus, the end result would be a bit far from a clean conversation. The image with the bird - and its conversation to .jpg and .webp was a clean conversation (since it didn't involve any enhancing - like noise reduction). If i did the same (converted/compressed the image & also enhance it) - then there wouldn't be any point in comparing .png vs .jpg vs .webp (or .tiff) - since it's not their compression/conversation algorithms - whom did the trick - but the extra enhancing tools. I mean, if that too was taken into account - then be it .jpg or .webp - with the help of enhancing tools - the final result would look better than the original. 😜

....but, isn't that the point of using good gear and proper editing techniques??? 🤷‍♂️

Regardless, the point of the image was not to show off editing prowess or camera tech, but to convey the point that it could be the way the image was shot or photo editing technique, not the photo-editor (Photoshop) itself resulting in a, in this case, grainy image.

Not trying to be rude just addressing your comments.

Sure, i'm not questioning that (what can be achieved with the help of gear or editing techniques). It's just that - using a "clean" conversation (derived from the source/original) - noise/artifacts are given for .jpg. No point in comparing that with an enhanced .jpg (where any noise is digitally removed). Since that's where your example - differed from our (or at least - it sure differ from mine). Where again, beats the purpose of a clean comparison between the capabilities of the format itself. Also, .jpeg is a bit of a not very nice format in this regard - yet, being so popular - even people who don't like it feel compelled to put up with it. I mean, even if you edit a image using .png and the result is exceptional. Uploading it on a social media platform - gets converted to a not very nice .jpg (probably using around 50% for quality - but that may also depend on image size, can't say for sure).

lol, no problem (you don't have to excuse yourself) - it's just a normal debate even if there's some misunderstandings (this to is normal sometimes - since it's not always that clear what people really mean) - it's not like you were aiming/trying to insult or anything like that. Cheers. :)
 

My Computer

System One

  • OS
    WinDOS 23H2
    Computer type
    Laptop
    CPU
    Intel & AMD
    Memory
    SO-DIMM SK Hynix 15.8 GB Dual-Channel DDR4-2666 (2 x 8 GB) 1329MHz (19-19-19-43)
    Graphics Card(s)
    nVidia RTX 2060 6GB Mobile GPU (TU106M)
    Sound Card
    Onbord Realtek ALC1220
    Screen Resolution
    1920 x 1080
    Hard Drives
    1x Samsung PM981 NVMe PCIe M.2 512GB / 1x Seagate Expansion ST1000LM035 1TB

Latest Support Threads

Back
Top Bottom