- Diberi peringkat 5 dari 5oleh BarrySoetoro, 5 tahun yang laluThank you . . . Kathleen Brade and Mark Smith for a wonderfully implemented add-on that does as you stated it would without any surprises or crashes. Finally, someone managed to build a screenshot-er that simply takes a perfect PNG/JPG snapshot and puts it where you tell it to after automatically, properly naming the image in accordance with the url/page title. Couldn't want an app to do it any better than Pagesaver WE!
Haven't tried JPG's yet because historically, PNG takes and renders the best images for such things as a very long website page, and your app completes that task very well, the best I've ever tried so far, and I've tried every available, in-browser screenshot-er app that's come along for many years.
A personal pref on this: Not that you'd mess things up, but I just don't see how this could be improved, its absolutely perfect! - hence, I'm afraid to update since this version simply because it seems like apps, usually through no fault of the creators, just inherently go awry because of browser conflict. So, I'll keep updating Waterfox and leaving this BEAUTY alone until the two become incompatible and I'm forced to update?
THANK YOU BOTH SO MUCH!
- Diberi peringkat 4 dari 5oleh Crick, 5 tahun yang laluHey, thanks for creating Page Saver WE — not quite up to the 5-stars of Pearl Crescent though.
BEST feature of Pearl was setting resolution.
NEED resolution setting in Page Saver WE.
Can resolution setting like Pearl Crescent had be added to Page Saver WE??
- Diberi peringkat 5 dari 5oleh Pengguna Firefox 12458171, 6 tahun yang laluPage Saver is the finest page- or image-saving extension that I've ever seen, by a pretty good margin. Simpler, smoother, more effective, and considerably more flexible than most other browser grab-oids.
- Diberi peringkat 3 dari 5oleh Pollux, 6 tahun yang lalu1° With this page : https://addons.mozilla.org/fr/firefox/addon/pagesaver-we/, i have the error : "Unable to capture page: internal browser pages cannot be captured" !?
2° it misses the ability to save as pdf instead of png or jpeg, as with pdfit (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/pdfit/)The "internal browser pages cannot be captured" message is caused by Mozilla's restrictions that prevent add-ons from accessing certain pages, including those at addons.mozilla.org (we plan to improve the error message).
Since most modern operating systems provide a "print to PDF" feature, we do not plan to add that capability to Page Saver.
- Diberi peringkat 5 dari 5oleh Pengguna Firefox 6696096, 6 tahun yang laluI loved the Pearl Crescent addon before FF57, but WE version is lacking some features:
1) capture the page without visual scrolling ***
2) use hotkey for capturing ***
3) save to Downloads\SUBFOLDER (like Downloads\PageSaver or something user-defined) ***
4) automatic filename increment postfix on name collision (instead of file overwrite) ***
5) some kind of solution to capturing of the fixed elements - for example the fixed footer panel (position:fixed; bottom: 0;) on "https://modnakasta.ua" is repeated on every scroll, instead of being drawn in the actual position (bottom: 0; in this case) or only once (as Screengrab addon does)
The features marked with *** were present in former versions of Pearl Crescent addon and/or are present in current addons from other developers (like mentioned Screengrab addon).
But Page Saver WE works faster on long complicated pages! ;-)
- Diberi peringkat 2 dari 5oleh Pengguna Firefox 13502162, 6 tahun yang laluBeaucoup plus compliqué que Pearl Crescent Page Server. Ne permet pas la copie d'une plage sélectionnée.Please excuse my English response.
It is true that Page Saver WE does not yet include all of the features of our “classic” Page Saver, but we hope to improve it in the future. I am not sure what you mean by Page Saver WE being more complicated, so please let us know more via email@example.com. Thanks!
- Diberi peringkat 4 dari 5oleh sdschramm, 6 tahun yang laluI made the switch to Firefox 55 and the "multiprocess/WebExtensions" and the old Page Saver was keeping me back. I tried so many alternatives and they all sucked. Then I found this one and so far its the best. My only two complains are 1: I wish I could save the screenshots to my desktop instead of the downloads folder and 2: I wish the full page screenshots would work in the background instead of having to wait for the page to scroll and stich them together. Otherwise it seems to work very well! Thank you!Thank you for your review. Unfortunately, Firefox's implementation of the WebExtensions API only allows saving to files within or below the configured download directory. If you want the Page Saver image files to go to your desktop, you will need to change your downloads directory within your Firefox preferences.
Scrolling to capture an "entire page" image is clearly not as good as grabbing the entire page without scrolling. When we created Page Saver WE, it was not possible to capture without scrolling. However, recently Mozilla has made additional canvas APIs available to WebExtensions which may allow us to avoid scrolling in the future.
- Diberi peringkat 5 dari 5oleh Aurelius Max, 6 tahun yang laluI tested Version 3.0.21 (Last Updated: June 22, 2017)
on Firefox 54.0.1 (32 bit) on Windows 8 with 3.5 GB memory.
It installs Ok.
The first page I tested it on was a small reddit subreddit.
It captured the page and opened a save page dialog to save the capture as a PNG file. This worked.
The second page I tested it on was 4chan's Comic and cartoon catalog, not particularly large with small thumbnails.
This also worked, the webpage is longer at 11000 pixels and I noticed the capture took longer.
Note it captures any hover regions as you would see them yourself when scrolling down a page.
I tested it on four more pages, largest size 2.8 MB, smallest 53 KB.
I've been a long time user of the older Pearl Crescent Page Saver, and was looking for a new saver for my new firefox profiles, and this fits the bill.
EDIT: I further tested changing the File name pattern to "%t %Y-%m-%d-%H-%M-%S" - to get finer-grained timestamps - and this worked.