Hello, the question is rather surprising given that Sorter has a Screen Capture tab, which hints that DT realises the use cases for screenshots. It is good for web clipping. The idea behind web clipping is to extract only the information that you are interested in to store and use it effectively. So, here we are talking about why I would want to save a piece I am interested in versus saving the entire website/page/document/video, etc. But I will try to give a couple of examples:
– Imagine I am searching through many online stores looking for items that I or my friend may like. Each item usually has multiple photos, but you don’t need all of them to recall the item; you need just one that you like the most, the one on your screen right now. It is not enough to just download this image (which may not be possible or too complex to deal with, especially given that images on the web may be in .webp format, which has limited use outside of that), you also would like the price info and basic specs included next to the item on the same screenshot, which I would like to save to consider for purchase in the future.
– Another day, you scroll through a 400-page book/report online and see a scheme/structure that is of good use to you. If you go the PDF way, you will need either to save the entire report (which may not be downloadable and only available through a viewer).
– Taking a screenshot from a video on some online platform (which may also include a side note outside the player such as CC or user comments).
– And so on: specific dishes on menus, product comparisons, an inspirational design idea, certain bank terms, how-tos;
Why are other formats not suitable?
Dynamic formats (like HTML and Web Archive):
-
What you want to save may be deleted from the web, so you will also need to save all the assets (many files, a big size and they may still not work if they rely on JS);
-
Not convenient to look through nor share (and may not be accessible by another person due to a paywall or login area);
-
Not focused on a specific area (may require zooming-in or scrolling), blurring the idea of efficient data storing, not to mention that you will forget what you saved it for;
Static formats (other than screenshots):
-
We both know saving a webpage to PDF will result in rather disappointing results: on top of badly interpreted page layout and missed data, you will end up having human verification screens, overlays, full-screen cookie windows (and you will know all that only after you check what you have saved!). And as mentioned above, what you are interested in may not be available right on the page – sometimes you need to use a slider, expand some area manually, and so on. Web pages are often too complex to bluntly save them;
-
Size? The entire web page saved as PDF may take 5 – 30 mb (not convenient to store nor share);
-
And again, not focused on a specific area (may require zooming-in or scrolling), blurring the idea of efficient data storing, not to mention that you will forget what you saved it for;
Put another way, after you’ve invested the effort to identify and isolate the specific element you want to keep, you want to save it in its current state. You don’t want a format that requires you to re-engage that same focused thinking to find that spot again down the line. Ultimately, the goal is to preserve the outcome of your focused search, not the source material that necessitated it. Yet saving the source is useful for future reference.
Some other file-management apps have a built-in browser plugin that automatically preserves the page title and URL source as you take your screenshots. With Sorter, you need to do all that manually, but even then, there is no URL field to fill in upon saving. So, your workflow goes like this: take a screenshot → save it → open DT → spot it → add URL. My suggestion is to make it at least two steps more efficient: take a screenshot → add URL → save it.
