This is the basic interface of ScreenGet.
The long Status bar shows the program's current state: IDLE (doing nothing), RECORDING, or PAUSED.
The Shots box shows how many screens are in memory.
The three buttons are used to take and save screenshots.
Clicking File, Open Shot Directory will open the folder where your screenshots are saved, allowing you to view them directly.
By clicking File, then Config, various options can be set.
Clicking Defaults will reset all options to the default value. OK will save current settings. Cancel will close the window without saving any changes.
Settings are saved in screenget.ini located in the same folder as ScreenGet.exe.
AnimGet is a program sprite rippers have been using for at least a decade. We all love it, but it's an old program and not without its flaws. One day I started thinking: what if I could make AnimGet go faster, or make it use less memory? It's a great program for sure, but it has some obvious limitations:
ScreenGet is the result, a program designed to address these and other issues, while standing as an homage to Michael Menne's original program (right down to the name and the Link icon.)
Here are some animated comparisons of what the two are capable of, taken on my computer - obviously performance will differ a bit from PC to PC. Each of these was taken of a pre-recorded gameplay movie using Visual Boy Advance's movie record feature. These animated GIFs are made from the first 50 screens captured from the exact same starting point; they are all animated at the same rate. Note that the "keep redundant frames" option in ScreenGet was NOT checked for this test.
AnimGet capturing at 10ms
ScreenGet capturing at 10ms
ScreenGet at capturing at 16ms
I hear your protests already: but more happens in the AnimGet example! Exactly, because more frames are being skipped. The animations capped by ScreenGet have more "pointless" frames where nothing really changes besides a flickering shadow, but the thing is, AnimGet would capture these too if it could. You can see that even set to 16ms, ScreenGet is much faster.
In fairness, ScreenGet is not without its downsides, the most obvious of which include:
Both programs have their pros and cons, so try 'em both and let me know what you think - send your thoughts to firstname.lastname@example.org.