Comparison

Webshotter vs ApiFlash

ApiFlash is deliberately minimal and priced accordingly. If a screenshot is a screenshot to you, it will do the job. The difference shows up the moment the picture has to be *right* rather than merely present.

Start free Read the docs

Where we win

Control over what the page renders with

Emoji set, locale, timezone, colour scheme and device are all parameters, and each of them changes the picture in a way CSS cannot.

Waiting properly

Every capture waits for the load event, network idle, every image decoded and the fonts painted — then for as long again as you ask with delay_ms.

A record of every call

What was asked for, what came back, how long each phase took, and which worker did it.

Where ApiFlash wins

Price at the bottom end

If you need a few hundred screenshots a month and do not care how they look, cheaper is cheaper.

Simplicity

Our parameter list is longer, and a longer list is a longer thing to learn.

Try the difference in one call

The emoji set is a parameter. Change one word and the browser that takes the picture changes with it.

bash

curl -X POST https://webshotter.com/api/v1/webshots \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer YOUR_TOKEN" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"url": "https://example.com", "emoji_set": "apple"}' \
  -o webshot.png

Other comparisons

vs Urlbox vs ScreenshotOne vs Browserless vs DIY Puppeteer

See it against ApiFlash yourself

A hundred webshots a month on the free plan, no card. Point both at the same page and look at the emoji.

Create your account Read the docs