Originally Posted by TulseLuper
tested both now , screen2pgm and screenshot , both worked fine and gave me regular images.
screen2pgm made a 469kb pgm , converted to jpeg got 37kb
and screenshot made a converted jpeg with 45kb
so , iwould need some info .
first . both of them are getting images trought the same way ?
if not ? wich of them is getting higher quality ?
and also , comparated to default screenshot [ home tap home ] we have a quality improvement ?
or even , wich conversion would get me better quality or definition or so ... thanks
titano , there´s a timeout for the script to make the capture ? how many seconds would that be ?
First: Yes they are both using the program screen2pgm, if you just run the tool it might (I don't really know) be a higher quality (maybe I should have converted it to a png and not a jpg). All I did was write a script to use his program, he did all the real work. I'm not sure how it's better or worse then the built in screen shot command, I don't know if the normal command has any limitations but this can take screenshots from anywhere at anytime.
Second: It's 30 seconds, then it launches the ImageViewer (so you know when it's done). You can change it by opening the script and editing the command "sleep 30" to what ever time you want (so "sleep 60" would be a minute).