paperclipvsurl-to-png
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| paperclip | url-to-png | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 88/100 | 49/100 |
| Rank in category | #4 of 125 in AI | #13 of 16 in Web Scraping |
| GitHub stars | 108 212 | 256 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +26 848 | — |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 10 | 2 |
| Latest release | v2026.1012.0 · 12 Oct 2026 | v2.1.4 · 18 Apr 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Typescript | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
paperclip scores 88/100 against 49/100 for url-to-png, so it is the safer default.
paperclip ships more often: 10 stable releases in the past year, against 2 for url-to-png.
If you want the quickest setup, url-to-png is easier to run; paperclip needs more configuration.
paperclip is growing faster right now (+26 848 stars in 30 days).
paperclip details →url-to-png details →
Swap a project
Keep paperclip, compare it with
Keep url-to-png, compare it with