Downloaded, installed, and worked great on Win 8.1/64.

This came at a perfect time. I don't do much with video so don't have much software to work with. I took some video on my phone of damage to my apartment, but the SD card decided to die before I could get screen caps for the insurance adjuster. The video file itself wasn't corrupted but when I tried to play it, it was all splotchy, and any frames I saved were blurry. Not one piece of software on this computer allowed me to step through the video frame by frame, so I tried today's GOTD software and told it to pull all frames at high quality. The process was intuitive enough that I could easily figure out what to do. And it's amazing how it worked! I've now scanned through over 1000 pictures it created and some are very clear and in focus. I know my use of it was not typical, but thanks to this software, I definitely have more good pictures documenting the damage than had I done the tedious task manually.

I'm really impressed with how fast it worked. Yes, I had to wait, but it was more like a 30 minute process as opposed to the agonizing overnight video conversions I've tried.

This is definitely a keeper. Thanks WonderFox and GOTD!

Seems to be the same software as Video to Picture version 3.2 published by Watermark-Software (c) AoaoPhoto Digital Studio given away 15/6/2010 from this site. Seems like another piece of software developed by one firm but SOLD by different companies.

#21 - Enki

Thank you so much for the warning. I'm very leery of cnet downloads. It used to be the "go to" place for downloads, virus scanned, reliable, and now all of their downloads are bundled with crap.

I downloaded a program from them less than a week ago, and aside from the fact that it didn't do what it was supposed to, it messed up the three browsers on my system...I almost cried when I saw that butt-ugly conduit search replacing my usual windows. It's been a few days now and still my browsers bear the scars of all of the crapware. During install, I turned down everything that wasn't part of the program, too, but still ended up with conduit and something called show pass or pass show, which put a footer of ads at the bottom of my screen. It's a nightmare. :(

I like it! I didn't have an ap that could do this, & it was awful to try to catch a still from a vid before. I had a vid of my lil dog who passed away, and not enough stills, so it felt very important to me. Media player wouldn't let me use a screenshot tool to copy a frame. So was really difficult to get some stills out of that vid. True, I wouldn't pay that price for it, but it is a useful software, & I think some people are just grouchy today & wouldn't have given a good review to a free million bucks. And others just like to sound like they are techs or something, or think they must find fault to have a comment valued. One always has to read these comments with an open mind & then try the offer yourself to find out how it works for you & your own needs. Of all the above, I like the comments from Mike best.
To Wonderfox- what is the "surprise" supposed to be? Is the odd panel offer free or what? I actually can't tell, without downloading & installing it first, & I don't like to do that without knowing if I'm going to have to uninstall when I discover it costs $.
Wondersoft, thanks so much for this offer! :)

The program crashed after making an animated GIF the second and third time I tried it.

No option for looping the animation.

Many of the settings shown in the Help files are not available.

Image output quality is not so great.

I preferred the software at http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/video-to-picture-converter/ from June 14, 2010.

Uninstalling.

Thank you anyways, Giveaway of the Day.

Note to mod: don't know if this will be posted to this page or not -- dosn't really matter -- if it's any work at all don't bother, as I'll be posting a duplicate in the forum.
Thanks
---

I don't want to argue or imply any sort of disrespect, and I don't have a big ego, wasn't offended by the phrase "approximate knowledge" [I had to Google it not being an "Adventure Time" fan]. But I did want to post correct info -- readers can check &/or research as wanted/needed, but I think it helps when and if they know something is or may be wrong so they know to look.

My original comment was to the effect that you want to use as lossless a format as possible when you're storing content that you'll work on later -- that applies to still images [e.g. raw or tif or psd etc. rather than jpeg], and audio [.wav or .w64 rather than mp3 or aac], and it applies to video. Windows Media can actually work, as can mpg2 with the right settings, but most in the industry use something like UT Video, or the HD codecs from Avid etc. You definitely do not want to use one of the mpeg 4 type codecs as you'll throw out too much data needlessly -- those include older plane Jane .wmv, older DivX, Xvid etc. The ffmpeg-based converters that have been on GOTD along with any others that I've tried, e.g. XMedia Recode, won't let you use something like UTVideo, even though you've got it installed in Windows, but most often use Xvid instead [XMedia Recode does give you a few more options besides Xvid, but nothing I'd use for intermediates nowadays]. As general advice I said & still say, avoid ffmpeg as possible for storing intermediates -- it offers little to no benefits for that particular use that I'm aware of, & will probably limit your flexibility.

Someone apparently took offense at that... No I must apologize to everyone that didn't read papin's post -- in that case ignore this please. [I know I wish I could have, but bad info bothers me. :( ] Nonetheless, maybe there's some info in here that's worthwhile.

"1. ffmpeg does not use xvid unless you tell it to do so. If you don’t have the xvid codec installed, you can use ffmpeg nonetheless. Example: ffmpeg -c ..."

Running ffmpeg from the command line [DOS prompt], which is what you're talking about, the basic syntax is ffmpeg -i [InputFileHere] -c [CodecNameHere] [OutputFileNameHere]. It may or may not work, depending on if it wants to talk to the installed codec you specified. Without naming any codec the default is FMP4 -- it adds a fair amount of compression [1.5 GB lossless avi to 19 MB]. There's not a lot of info on it, but as there isn't that much in the way of original mp4 code freely available it's probably similar under the hood to Xvid, which along with DivX started out as a bit of early code from Microsoft for their .wmv format. At any rate you're correct, if you want to run ffmpeg from the command line, specifying a lossless codec that you've installed, *maybe* ffmpeg will work to write your intermediate avi. In context however, I'm not sure how many people reading this will want to hunt up a compiled win32 version of ffmpeg to use on the command line that may or may not work when they try it.

"2. MP4 is a container, not a codec; it can store audio, video, subtitles, and whatever you want (e.g. multiple audio files)."

Mpeg4 is a video spec. often/usually called mp4. It's not like mpg2, where most mpg2 is similar to what's on DVDs, but includes quite a variety of similar encoding techniques or technologies. Mpeg4 video can be in all sorts of container files, .mov, .avi, .m2ts etc., though the official container for *some* mpeg4 video is .mp4, & most types of mpeg4 video will work in a .mp4 container. AVC for example can reside in a file named .mp4, .avi, .mov, .m2ts, .ts, and on & on, & yes, AVC adheres to, is covered under part of the mpg4 spec.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4
"Most of the features included in MPEG-4 are left to individual developers to decide whether to implement them."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4_Part_14
"MPEG-4 Part 14 or MP4 is a digital multimedia format..." "The only official filename extension for MPEG-4 Part 14 files is .mp4..."
.
"3. xvid is not a an alternative to WMV and will never be, because WMV is Microsoft proprietary format for video encoded with Microsoft’s proprietary codecs whilst xvid is free software (unlike divx). It is not a “mp4 video codec” either as you wrote it. Xvid is an alternative to DivX, and certainly not compatible with it. By “compatible” I suppose you meant a device (e.g. a DVD player) able to read both xvid and divx encoded videos. For example, many Microsoft devices are compatible only with WMV."

http://www.xvid.org/FAQ.14.0.html
"Xvid is a MPEG-4 video codec for PC. "
.
When Microsoft was initially working on .wmv some folks used some of the code & with a bit of re-working it became the earliest version of DivX. DivX went on over time to become pay-ware, & then a regular company. Before DivX moved beyond Xvid they could be used interchangeably -- the 4CC codes that Windows went by could be either/or. DivX could & can use different levels of post processing -- the player performs that post processing on the video after it's been read during decoding & before display. Many DVD players could play DivX video but the level of post processing that they could handle varied, so you had different levels of DivX files, & some, not all could be played by some, not all DVD players. Now that they've moved to AVC, the older, lower level DivX is still around, and still for the most part interchangeable with Xvid. Many of the converters on GOTD offer an option of DivX which was/is only Xvid under a DivX label

I don't know what to say re: "Alternative". Earlier Windows Media & DivX & Nero Digital & Real etc. were mpeg4 codecs that offered similar levels of compression & quality. You used one or you chose to use another. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alternative

"4. AVI is not a codec, it’s a container. You can put any codec (Cinepak, …) inside an AVI file. In this case, VirtualDub may not be able to open it, especially if it contains VBR audio."

Yes, an avi file is a container, though many formats are unsupported, & many are frowned upon because they just don't work well. The original comment that started all this was someone suggesting that they could use whatever converter to get an avi file that V/Dub would import. That implies Xvid more than it implies Avid. Generally you should avoid that unneeded conversion -- that's why there's Avisynth -- but if you must make sure you can use a good, modern, [near] lossless codec.

Well, I never leave feedback but this time I thought why not. This is a great little program, it does what it advertises and it does it well. I had some old family video from the 60's and 70's and always wanted to get some photos from that era. I ran the program and I got my wish. The quality is as good as the film you put into it. Thank you
Works a treat on Windows 7 64bit.
Giveawayoftheday and WonderFox, keep it up :-)

Not sure what all of the whining is about. Installed fine in Win 7 HP x64, no issues at all. Even opens .flv movies. Creates beautiful .jpg pictures with no difficulty at all. (My only complaint is the installation is forced to WonderFox program folder in my start menu. I prefer to name products with meaningful names that are easy for me to remember. VERY small nit.) Thanks, GOTD and WonderFox!

#21 Enki_Amenra
Nothing nasty happened to me when I downloaded and installed my suggestion for the simple reason that I declined the offer of their toolbar during the installation procedure.
There was nothing sneaky in the installation as the offer of the toolbar was clearly stated.
So for anyone who wants a very useful frame extraction program I suggest they ignore your Rant and decline the offer of the toolbar during installation.

Great application/software. Thanks . Installed quick and does what it says on the box. I hardly ever find good software here. But this one is good.

#12:
Haven't read your comment before I posted. Don't confuse other people with your approximate knowledge:

1. ffmpeg does not use xvid unless you tell it to do so. If you don't have the xvid codec installed, you can use ffmpeg nonetheless. Example:
ffmpeg -c <codec name> ...

2. MP4 is a container, not a codec; it can store audio, video, subtitles, and whatever you want (e.g. multiple audio files).

3. xvid is not a an alternative to WMV and will never be, because WMV is Microsoft proprietary format for video encoded with Microsoft's proprietary codecs whilst xvid is free software (unlike divx). It is not a "mp4 video codec" either as you wrote it. Xvid is an alternative to DivX, and certainly not compatible with it. By "compatible" I suppose you meant a device (e.g. a DVD player) able to read both xvid and divx encoded videos. For example, many Microsoft devices are compatible only with WMV.

4. AVI is not a codec, it's a container. You can put any codec (Cinepak, ...) inside an AVI file. In this case, VirtualDub may not be able to open it, especially if it contains VBR audio.

#7:
So, considering what I said above, feel free to use ffmpeg as you wish. Besides, it is almost the unique multi-platform free library that lets you do exactly what you want the way you want. And you're not limited to encoding/decoding.

You can also extract all frames like this:
ffmpeg -i video.flv -re -y -an image%4d.bmp
where an=no audio (not needless to say), re=video frame rate automatically taken from video source (use -r XXX otherwise), y=overwrite output files, and .bmp=an image not transcoded (no risk of losing details like JPG and faster than PNG, at the cost of huge disk space consumption). If you plan to have more than 9999 files, change the %4d accordingly. Of course, you can extract only a portion of the video, or extract every X second(s).

#8 XP-Man, you should read the comments section before you suggest a download to members who may not be able to recognize a bad download.

From the comments sections of your link:




"INSTALLS SPAM TOOLBAR THAT CANNOT BE UNINSTALLED"

June 28, 2012 | By spazzychalk

Version: Free Video to JPG Converter 5.0.13

Pros

INSTALLS SPAM TOOLBAR THAT CANNOT BE UNINSTALLED

Cons

INSTALLS SPAM TOOLBAR THAT CANNOT BE UNINSTALLED

Summary

INSTALLS SPAM TOOLBAR THAT CANNOT BE UNINSTALLED


Read more: Free Video to JPG Converter - Free download and software reviews - CNET Download.com http://download.cnet.com/Free-Video-to-JPG-Converter/3000-2194_4-10764760.html#ixzz2qmGVJDrL
_

I'd venture to say this is the 'Conduit/DLC5 Toolbar' pile of junk that some downloads sneak it into your system.

It AUTOMATICALLY changes your home page, it AUTOMATICALLY changes your default search engine, it AUTOMATICALLY installs a terrible toolbar, it is very tiring - with a lot of steps needed to remove these crap-piles.

Even using the best uninstaller and removing any left-over files doesn't always completely remove it. In most cases, Win8/8.1 users are left with a modified registry and an alert every 'Start-Up' that says, "Background Container/Conduit Background Container" missing.

It's tricky to remove this for an average user and it's positioned in a place where just one wrong move could cause catastrophic system failure and those wrong moves are very easy to make - regardless how careful you are.

Thanks for the suggestion of a potentially better option to this GAOTD, but those irate member comments were an instant warning to leave the room and never look back.

What is the difference between WonderFox Video to Picture Converter 1.1 from January 18, 2014 -- and Video to Picture Converter from from June 14, 2010?

Compare these:

(Item 1)
Video to Picture Converter (June 14, 2010)
http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/video-to-picture-converter/
http://www.watermark-software.com/video-to-picture/video-to-picture.html
http://www.watermark-software.com/video-to-picture/video-to-picture-tutorial.html
http://www.watermark-software.com/video-to-picture/video-to-picture-screenshot/video-to-picture-Screenshot-main.html
http://www.watermark-software.com/video-to-picture/images/main.jpg

(Item 2)
WonderFox Video to Picture Converter 1.1 (January 18, 2014)
http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/video-to-picture-converter-1-1/
http://www.videoconverterfactory.com/video-to-picture-converter/
http://www.videoconverterfactory.com/video-to-picture-converter/images/item1.jpg
http://www.mostiwant.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/WonderFox-Video-to-Picture-Converter.jpg

Also, what is the difference between WonderFox Video to Picture Converter -- and WonderFox Video to GIF Converter?

Compare these:

(Item 2 again)
WonderFox Video to Picture Converter
http://www.videoconverterfactory.com/video-to-picture-converter/
http://www.mostiwant.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/WonderFox-Video-to-Picture-Converter.jpg

(Item 3)
WonderFox Video to GIF Converter
http://www.videoconverterfactory.com/video-to-gif-converter/
http://img.brothersoft.com/screenshots/softimage/w/wonderfox_video_to_gif_converter-517505-13861464250.jpeg

All three seem awfully similar to me.

Oh, & while it can create "pictures", it has no way to make a "contact sheet" out of those pictures.
You might think that would be a feature it would have incorporated.

A "Still GIF (*.gif)" is in reality a PNG.

UI could be better, with the whole "Output" dialog included in the main interface.

The only overwrite options are to or not to overwrite.
No automatic renaming or anything like that.

Resize is very slow & resource intensive.
Perhaps that's the nature of the beast?

I could see one using the Brighten or Gray Scale filters.
The others...?

On some dialogs, if you want to overwrite a selection, you need a leading digit.
Like Output Rate; will accept "0.25" but not ".25".

I have always used Imagegrab, its free and does a nice job and is also portable.

Home page: http://paul.glagla.free.fr/imagegrab_en.htm
Download link: http://paul.glagla.free.fr/fichiers/imagegrab_50en.zip

GOM player does this. You can capture single frames or successive frames, as many as you like, Oh yeah, it's completely free.

#7:
Actually, there is only one format to use: the one that gives best results, i.e. either uncompressed or not (.bmp, .tiff, .png, ...). Then for batch processing, Irfanview can do a lot if you go through each option (just don'select manually a transparency color, lol).

#6 (xp man):
Forget your old software. Get Daum Potplayer. Load a video file. The "K" shortcut opens a bunch of video capture options. Haven't tried them but the possibilities go way beyond what's today's GOTD offers. And the output quality should be OK, by judging what it does with thumbnails.

Trying to reconcile the through-the-roof rating with the almost-universally-negative reviews. You zany GOTD'ers! ;-) Guess I'll just try it out myself.

Free Video to JPG Convertor looks pretty sweet too - thanks for the tip XP-Man!

#5: "So I tried it on an HD m2ts file, output as “BEST” – ani gif isn’t that great. Many artifacts.
So I tried .tga frames as they suppose to give best quality … but than I found no good interlaced frames. I can’t find any DE-intelace option .
This is a major drawback of such software"

The problem is the video -- not the software. Most video that you can get your hands on is just not that great when it comes to image quality, but at 24 - 30 fps you don't notice. RE: Interlace & Deinterlace, if the video you have is actually interlaced, you can usually get the best results deinterlacing using various different methods in Avisynth or filters in VirtualDub, though some folks I think have done work in this area using Handbrake -- the idea is you get more total image data shooting interlaced, which you then use Handbrake on to achieve higher quality progressive frames than you could otherwise. That said, if you're going to wind up going back to video once you've processed the frames as still images, you might process the individual fields as 1/2 height stills & reassemble them into interlaced video afterwards. 1 interlaced frame = 2 fields.

* * *

#7: "I believe you are thinking of VirtualDub... It is limited to avi video, but with the zillions of converters offered here, that should not be a huge drawback."

You don't want to convert your video to avi just to disassemble it into individual images -- you'll lose far too much quality. The traditional way you get whatever format of video into VirtualDub is to use Avisynth. After installing Avisynth you write a few lines of scripting in a plain text file you name with an .avs extension -- for something like this there are plenty of examples on-line you can copy/paste. An example would be a single line script:
DirectShowSource("Your Path & Filename Here",The fps For That File Here,video=true)

When you open that .avs file in VirtualDub or whatever program, it will use whatever Direct Show [DS] software you have installed that's available & that can decode that video for playback, say in Windows Media Player. Avisynth will open that file, read the picture data frame by frame, feeding it to VirtualDub as if VirtualDub had opened the video file itself. That skips re-encoding the video & writing it to disk as an avi file, avoiding that quality loss & usually saving quite a bit of time.

If you do decide you need a avi file for whatever reason, Do Not use ffmpeg or anything based on it if at all possible, & that includes the converters that have been on GOTD. Ffmpeg includes and uses Xvid. Xvid is a mp4 video codec that's compatible with old versions of DivX, & was designed to be an alternative to formats like Windows Media [.wmv] for final distribution back before there were better alternatives like AVC. Instead use a [near] lossless format for your avi file(s) -- I use the UT Video codec, but Avid has a nice codec too that's capable of HD that they give away free. What I use, FWIW, is Avisynth -> VirtualDub, having V/Dub write a avi file using UT Video.

The traditional reason to turn a video into a series of stills was so those stills could be manipulated in something like an image editor, then chained back together again in a new video file. It's not as popular as it once was because it's not as needed as it once was, but there's still stuff that's pretty hard to accomplish any other way. I think maybe the example the most people have heard of is painting out the wires suspending actors in mid-air, though several image editors nowadays will import video, letting you paint frame by frame without going to the bother of converting everything to stills first. A lot of stuff that used to be edited this way is also now done using green screen techniques, where everything in the frame that's a particular color is replaced, e.g. the screen showing weather maps on TV during the forecast.

IMHO the reason most home users or video hobbyists convert video to a series of stills is to use batch processing in an image editor, for stuff like color correction, sharpening, noise removal etc. that otherwise might take more expensive video editing software. VirtualDub was mentioned, & that's one of the free tools that's been often used to create the stills & reassemble them, but the problem with that is VirtualDub has limited import formats it'll accept, so you often have to install, learn, & use Avisynth -- WonderFox Video to Picture Converter makes that end of things easier. And since Wonderfox software as a rule is portable, there's not a big reason not to give it a try.

As far as using stills from video as some sort of replacement for photos, it generally doesn't work so well because most people don't have source video that's anywhere near the sharpness & clarity they get using just the camera in their cell phone to take pictures. A cell or tablet or camera takes a bit of time processing & then writing the image to your memory card or wherever that image is stored -- the fastest they can manage is measured in pictures per minute. Unless you've got Very expensive gear, when you shoot or record video a camera, cell, &/or tablet is going to capture images that are much lower quality so they can be captured & stored at 24-30 fps. Different companies have tried developing software that averages the pictures from several frames to get one, higher quality still, but AFAIK no one has ever achieved more than a minor improvement.

I don't really see the need for this as I've been capturing and mixing frames with VLC for years.

Installation routine suggest 'Program Files' - okay for english Windows-Versions, not for other languages, but can be set by user. Today's standard is the windows path for programs.

Very high memory consumption (but okay for a tool like this).

Cannot detect anamorph video (i.e. PAL 720x576 in 16:9), BUT the output can be set manually (i.e 1024x576).

Registration details are stored in the file 'Setup.ini' within the programs folder. Therefore this tool is portable.

It's a keeper. Even if you don't need it now, just make a copy (or zip) the folder for later use.

I do a round about way to get an image from a video - use a screen capture program like garwin and save it in the format you want eg jpeg .. crop the image after and Bob's your uncle -lol .

The following freeware program is much more useful than today's download in my opinion:-
http://download.cnet.com/Free-Video-to-JPG-Converter/3000-2194_4-10764760.html

It allows many different options for the way frames are extracted, if combined with one of the many free video converters to modify the frame size it allows a much better combination of functions than today's download and for free!

@ #6 - xpman - I believe you are thinking of VirtualDub. It is free at http://virtualdub.sourceforge.net and it does all this plus more.

Well, not all. As you said, picture format output is limited to just a couple image formats, but it's main function is to be a nice little video editor.

It is limited to avi video, but with the zillions of converters offered here, that should not be a huge drawback.

I tried this on Win8 and it's OK. But the only advantage of this over VD is the many formats it handles.

A number of years ago I had a freeware program (unfortunately forgot its name) that would extract images from video, if memory serves me correctly it would only do it for one type.
Having said that it was very flexible in the way it extracted video, for example every so many frames, a number of equally spaced frames.
I anticipated today's program would work in a similar fashion and that it would do much more for such a high price.
It has none of the above useful features but, as #3 Karl correctly points out, a number of useless features.
I hope someone will offer something similar that is worth having, today's offering is far too limited to be of much use and way overpriced!

Installed fine on XPSP3,
So I tried it on an HD m2ts file, output as "BEST" - ani gif isn't that great. Many artifacts.
So I tried .tga frames as they suppose to give best quality ... but than I found no good interlaced frames. I can't find any DE-intelace option .
This is a major drawback of such software

installed fine and thats were the good part stops, I tried it on a home movie, it took 4589 snaps and out of all of them only 6 pics were worth keeping and they were not that good

uninstalled

Installed and registered without problems on a win 8.1 64 Bit system.

Difficult to formulate my impression.

This program takes a video and creates pictures. Serial pictures. The output rate can be chosen between a whatever high rate to 0,5 pictures per second. This is simply lousy bad programming, because you can choose 100 pictures per second from a video with a framerate of 24 fps and if you want to take a picture every 10 second, you cannot use the slider, but you must type in by hand.

My second claim is the program window, which cannot be resized. On my big screen I want to resize windows to the point, where I can really see something...

On a "special effect" (called "special efficay")window on the right site you can manipulate the produced images. The programmer must have misunderstood something. He was happy to include a free picture manipulation library, of course. But why the hell should one "emboss", "blur" or "green" the images?

You can choose to take an image from the video by yourself, but it is missing an automatic scene detection.

I choose a frame to take a picture and detected that the video controls are not standard. The "pause" button does not switch between "pause" and "play". Should in my opinion.

I enlarged the picture and choose between the three different interpolation method. Again : Why the hell should I choose "sawtooth"? The programmer thinks in funny picture manipulation.

I'll try a verdict : easy to use, when you really want to take a picture every second from a video or make an animated gif with pictures, taken every 0,5 seconds. And blur these. Why should I do this?

No real use for me. Uninstalled via reboot.

Thanks GOATD and Wonderfox.

Thanks for this awesome giveaway.
I was using the trial version and now I can use full version :)

Useful Guide for Users to 100% Successfully Use the Product
Step 1. Download Zip package from GOTD
Step 2. Unzip the Package and run setup.exe to install the software.
Step 3. Open “read me” txt file, use the registration code to register it.

Learn more about this Product to Get a Surprise:
http://www.videoconverterfactory.com/video-to-picture-converter/

Friendly Reminder: WonderFox Soft Christmas Promotion is Re-Open Only Today specially for GOTD users. Check it here: http://www.videoconverterfactory.com/promotion.html