10/11/2023 0 Comments Adobe captivate vs camtasiaWhile editing a slide, Captivate displays the captured screen on the bottom, topped by a timeline containing the components captured by Captivate or later added during editing.Deciding on which development tool will suit your needs is an important step in making sure your development process is a successful one.Īre you creating a video demonstration with little or no interactivity?Īre you creating a series of interactive software tutorials as part of a course?ĭo you need to import content from PowerPoint and present it with or without voiceover but include animation and special effects? Here we’re showing how to select a file for encoding. This is shown in Figure 2.On the bottom of the Figure is a screen from Sorenson Squeeze, which was the application we captured in most trials. However, one of the product’s strongest features is the range of additional content you can also automatically capture. In its most basic mode of operation, Captivate stores the image background and mouse clicks and motion separately. For example, a simple two-minute capture might produce the 20 screens shown in Figure 1.įigure 1 (below): Rather than capture one long movie, Captivate captures a series of screens, each containing one significant mouse movement. Rather than capture one long video file with embedded mouse movements, Captivate captures a series of screens, each containing one significant mouse click and movement. But they’re not captured with the video, and your mouse clicks and movements are stored as an un-editable portion of video file. When it’s time to edit, Camtasia Studio lets you add tracks for components like captions, callouts, picture-in-picture, quizzes, and the like. The result is a single video file containing all your points, clicks, and navigations through the program and the associated audio. Like most screen-capture utilities, Camtasia captures a video of the screen as you navigate around it, plus audio if you enable narration. Then we’ll return to Camtasia and detail its additional functionality. Let’s start with basic Camtasia-like capture functionality to provide a good offset to Captivate’s extensive "object-oriented" features. In fact, the more time you spend with both tools, the more you begin to realize that if you’re creating a range of training, demonstration, and presentation projects, you probably need both tools. If you need to zoom in to the software screen that you’ve captured, Camtasia is your only choice. If you plan to offer both software demonstrations and written instructions-say, in PDF-the ability to print out Captivate slides is an irresistible timesaver. The situation reverses if you’re creating a quiz, where Captivate offers a much richer toolset. For example, Camtasia excels at capturing streaming video, which Captivate does poorly. On the other hand, if you’re skilled in Macromedia Director or Flash, you’ll find Camtasia a blunt instrument and Captivate more intuitive and precise.īeyond these, however, are certain functions at which one product excels and the other either doesn’t perform or performs poorly. If you’re a video editor, you’ll find Camtasia easy to learn and use, and Captivate unnecessarily complex. On the other hand, if you’re creating interactive demos or training, or a complex software demonstration, Captivate is superior.Įven where they meet in the middle, operating paradigms and interface are so different that they will intuitively appeal to different users. If you’re creating a quick-and-dirty software demo, or a PowerPoint presentation to post to a Web site, Camtasia is a better tool. Macromedia Captivate by Adobe and TechSmith Camtasia Studio 3.1 are similar software tools with uniquely different strong points. This article originally appeared in the May issue of Streaming Media magazine. Review: Adobe Captivate and TechSmith Camtasia Studio
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |