Camtasia vs. ScreenFlow: Creating Your First Screencast
If you have need to visually demonstrate your product, and you have the resources, then it just makes sense to produce a screencast. With the release of ScreenFlow 2.0, I thought it’d be useful to perform a real-world comparison review of the screencast heavyweight champ versus the relative newcomer (at least to the Mac), Camtasia.
Getting Started
I started this comparison by creating the same video in both Camtasia and ScreenFlow. Both applications are very straightforward to setup and get going in creating the screencast. Camtasia gets a little bit of an edge for configuration because, unlike ScreenFlow, you do not have to install a separate audio driver.
However, once you get started recording, both applications provide you with a simple countdown prior to recording. As a primer, try to write your script prior to recording. This way, you will have a consistent experience for your customer once you complete production.
Please note, I did not try to record a screencast across multiple displays or using an external microphone. I used what most of us have — a MacBook (or a desktop) and the built-in microphone.
Basic Editing
After I recorded the basic screencast, I was presented with the Editor window within each program:
Screenflow Main Window
Camtasia Main Window
Both programs have very similar editing experiences using a timeline. ScreenFlow has the added advantage of separating out the audio from the video portions of the recording. This is a great experience, because you can also add another voiceover quite easily. In contrast, Camtasia merges the audio and video. It wasn’t easily discoverable how to add or change the existing audio recording. With my limited skills, being able to re-record the audio as a separate track was very handy.
Enhancing Your Screencast Recording
Each has a plethora of features to modify your recording.
- Cropping: Remove extra portions of the video that you don’t need.
- Trimming: Remove any extra (or bad) audio/video from the timeline.
- Playback tools: Play, reverse, fast-forward.
- Import Media: Additional audio, video or images.
- And a whole lot more…
What’s nice is that as you begin to explore more in ScreenFlow and Camtasia, they both provide simple video tutorials to show you how to use the features. For someone new to creating screencasts, this is very helpful.
Here are a few glimpses of the app once I inserted some text, graphics and transitions.
ScreenFlow: with additional text box and transitions
Camtasia: with additional graphics, text and transitions
I did perform a little trimming (Camtasia calls this Delete or Ripple Delete) at the end of each video so that you can’t see me click/end the recordings (there is no way to avoid this, although it would be nice if both tools had this as an option). Both tools make this really easy to do.
Both applications have advanced audio capabilities. ScreenFlow has true audio ducking, or the ability to decrease the volume of one recording while another audio volume is increased. Camtasia offers audio transition effects, which offers some flexibility, but not anywhere near as rich as ScreenFlow.
Unfortunately, neither application has great iLife integration, so I can’t directly insert audio clips from GarageBand. I think this is a missed opportunity for both Camtasia and ScreenFlow.
The Victor
This is a tough call. However, I give the slight edge to ScreenFlow because of its ability to edit audio separately as well as its UI for editing different properties of a recording. I happen to prefer the overall Camtasia UI over ScreenFlow’s as it seems more like iMovie ‘09 to me.
Ultimately, you have to decide which items are more important to you:
- Features/Functionality
- User Experience
- Price
ScreenFlow 2.0 is priced at $99 (or $29 for an upgrade). Similarly, Camtasia 1.0.1 is currently priced at $99 (this is a promotional price, the web site shows the full retail for $149).
If you have limited funds, there is the screen recording capability in QuickTime X, a component of Snow Leopard. If you’ve already upgraded to Snow Leopard, then you have this option available. Otherwise, the Snow Leopard upgrade is $29. Please note that QuickTime X is nowhere in the same league as ScreenFlow or Camtasia. However, if you have a new Mac that includes Snow Leopard and iLife ‘09 (which includes iMovie ‘09), you can make some very simple Screencasts, excluding the fancier features available from either ScreenFlow or Camtasia.
The Videos
Don’t laugh, they’re horrible.
Camtasia
ScreenFlow
Tweet This (41)
Toni P on October 28th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Thanks for the comparison, Matthew, very interesting. I personally use ScreenFlow, for many of the reasons you stated. I was surprised that you said ScreenFlow required you to install a separate audio driver. I’ve NEVER had to do that (neither with my original installation, or my just updated version 2.0). And I have several colleagues that use SF, that have not had to install an audio driver… I wonder if that is something specific with your set-up?
As for the incompatibility with GarageBand – I agree, that’s one area that could be improved. But the way I get around it is to record (with ScreenFlow) a separate audio track of my GarageBand music playing. Then I just drag that into a new ScreenFlow project to use as background music.
thanks again!
Staff Comment Matthew Bookspan, TheAppleBlog on October 28th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Toni – I had to install an audio driver with ScreenFlow for it to use the computer audio. Further, at least for me, ScreenFlow would not use my internal microphone until I installed the driver as well.
Barry Johnson on October 28th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
This is inaccurate – with Camtasia I was prompted to install a driver called SoundFlower when I selected record from microphone.
Dan York on October 28th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Matthew, thanks for the comparison. I used to use Camtasia (and TechSmith’s Jing) on Windows, but after switching to Mac two years ago I eventually started using ScreenFlow 1.0 when it became available and have been extremely pleased with it. I have not yet upgraded to SF 2.0, so this was interesting to read. I’m pleased to see ScreenFlow has added text overlays and transitions, which were two very glaring omissions in the 1.0 product.
Like Toni, I’ve not had *any* problem with ScreenFlow and audio drivers on either of two Mac systems (a MacBook Pro and an iMac). I just installed it and started recording right away using both the computer audio and the internal microphone. Again, though, this was ScreenFlow 1.0.
Thanks again for the comparison.
Staff Comment Matthew Bookspan, TheAppleBlog on October 28th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Barry – I don’t recall this in v1.0.1. I will try to reproduce with a clean install. Either way, the separate audio driver should be packaged up in an installer and/or with more explanation as to why it needs to be installed. It’s an odd user experience to install bits post “install” aka “drag-and-drop”.
Dan – thanks for the feedback. Both apps really are excellent. I think Camtasia would really take the lead if it was more in parity with its Windows sibling. I don’t expect Techsmith or Telestream to rest on their laurels, which means only great things to come for us users.
rickdude on October 28th, 2009 at 11:03 pm
Thanks for the tips on how to find this blog through Google!
I like Screenflow, but I’ve had problems upgrading. I downloaded version 2, overwriting version 1 (not a good idea, I know), and now Screenflow takes over my whole system, slowing everything to a crawl, to the point where I can’t even launch Activity Monitor to quit it. And it won’t let me upgrade my licence. Anyone else have similar problems?
Zettt on October 29th, 2009 at 6:35 am
Almost anyone of us at Mac OS X Screencasts uses ScreenFlow.
It’s interface is just beautiful to use and the implemented callouts are much more usable than Camtasia. I am one of those lucky ones who have both applications installed. Recently I did a screencast for Audi and was forced to use Camtasia. Camtasia is great, the editing is much better than in ScreenFlow, but the callouts and how the callouts are actually “called” is horrible. ScreenFlow has a function to zoom in on the mouse cursor or the foreground window. Camtasia has the same functionality, but it’s 100% unusable in my eyes.
I have to admin that SF2.0 is currently bugging me like **@#45!!! I was recording a screencast of Blogo and MarsEdit yesterday. Both screencasts have been edited (with zoom and callout and everything), but when I added my custom intro and outro movie to the screencast SF2.0 crashes on save and sometimes corrupts the file in a way that it can’t be opened anymore.
troy stein on October 30th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Hi Zettt,
If you’d be willing, I’d love to get more details about how we can improve the zooming functionality of Camtasia. I’m the product manager for it. Feel free to post your comments (good and bad– all are welcome) here or email me directly at t.stein at techsmith.com
Troy Stein
Camtasia for Mac Product Manager
Zettt on October 30th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Hi Troy,
May I send you a screencast on that feature?
I was only mailing with your (I suppose) marketing team (Betsy). Didn’t know that Techsmith is interested in our/my feedback.
That thing should be ready tomorrow.
Thanks for your offer. It’s much appreciated.
troy stein on October 31st, 2009 at 7:48 am
Please do! You can email it to me at t.stein at techsmith.com. Thanks!
Troy
Staff Comment Matthew Bookspan, TheAppleBlog on November 6th, 2009 at 3:37 am
Nice to have the Techsmith Product Manager responding. Great customer service!
DJ on October 29th, 2009 at 7:32 am
I think Screenflow is the one for me because of its better audio edits.
But can it record video that is playing live onscreen?
And can you crop your Screenflow image to include just the video, or a small part of the screen around it?
Staff Comment Matthew Bookspan, TheAppleBlog on November 6th, 2009 at 3:38 am
Yes, both Camtasia and Screenflow have this as an option. And yes, you can customize the cropping.
Serge on October 29th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Like Screenflow a lot. Lack of some useful features though.
Staff Comment Matthew Bookspan, TheAppleBlog on October 29th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
DJ – I did not try recording video at the same time, so I am unsure.
Everyone – it turns out that there is a mistake in this post. Camtasia:Mac does in fact separate audio from the video. It just isn’t discoverable unless you right-click the combined stream and tell them to separate.
I do believe that both apps are quite close in functionality and expect that as Camtasia is enhanced, it will surpass ScreenFlow. Further, it’s discomforting to see the feedback here as well as on Twitter the # of folks having issues with the 2.0 upgrade.
Brian on October 30th, 2009 at 11:30 pm
I’ve been doing a lot of research on ScreenFlow and Camtasia and this is by far the best review of both and best discussion I have come across, thanks.
I’m trying to decide which to go with. I was (am?) leaning towards ScreenFlow but Matt’s comment above of “…as Camtasia is enhanced, it will surpass ScreenFlow. Further, it’s discomforting to see the feedback here as well as on Twitter the # of folks having issues with the 2.0 upgrade.” Makes me think that long term Camtasia may be the better choice to go with.
Hard decision to make for me right now, I was planning to purchase one or the other next week.
I’ll be checking back here daily to help me make my decision.
Thanks.
troy stein on November 1st, 2009 at 7:58 pm
Hi Brian,
they are both great apps. I would download em and give em a try. One advantage of Camtasia:mac is that the output is not watermarked, so you can use it for work while you are testing it.
Troy Stein
Camtasia for Mac Product Manager
Mathew on October 31st, 2009 at 11:03 pm
Love ScreenFlow 2. No problems. Easy to set up. Great new features. No brainer of a choice for me. I have two computers where I do screencasting and I could never get Camtasia for the Mac to work on one of my machines. After 7 weeks of work with tech support at Techsmith I had to ask for a refund. But in my limited testing, I found that I actually preferred the ScreenFlow interface over Camtasia.
Overall it’s nice to have the competition between these 2 products—especially since SnapzPro has been dead for a few years now (officially they are “actively developing” the product, but it’s hard to find someone who believes them).
It’s not clear to me that Camtasia will end up being the better product in the end. I really have no idea if one will end up being significantly “better.” For now I need to make a fair number of screencasts in the next 12 months—so I have to go with the best product at this time for my needs. If that changes in 5 years then I’ll change products.
Alexis on November 2nd, 2009 at 2:26 pm
great article…nice comparisons…new to this blog but like what I see so far
question…what about iShowU and iShowU HD?
are these products not in the running any longer or what?
thanks guys
Alexis
Staff Comment Matthew Bookspan, TheAppleBlog on November 6th, 2009 at 3:35 am
Alexis, I did not include iShowU/iShowU HD in this particular head-to-head. If I had done a broader review, it would have been more informative (for example, here are all of the screencast tools available) vs. comparative (what you see now).
Frank Fulchiero on November 2nd, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Just wondering if it’s possible to monitor your own video, in a small window, while recording the screen, in either program. I can’t find this in the literature anywhere. To us it’s an important consideration.
Staff Comment Matthew Bookspan, TheAppleBlog on November 6th, 2009 at 3:39 am
Yes, both applications have this feature.
CraigS on November 11th, 2009 at 11:24 am
ScreenFlow installs an audio driver whereas Camtasia requires you to use a third party free app, SoundFlower. Installing and setting up SoundFlower involves additional steps. It also makes that app reliant on a third party developer for a mission critical function.
I do love and use SoundFlower for many things and it too works with ScreenFlow. An example of what the dependency issue can mean was when OS 10.6 came out SoundFlower was not yet compatible. It was updated within days but having to depend on a third party app is a risk in my opinion.
You’ll also see the ScreenFlow does a great job capturing at full frame rate. Try something demanding like a Hulu TV show for example. Reviewers have noted that. In addition many have reported that ScreenFlow uses lower CPU% which can be important when capturing in some CPU demanding situations.
The current version of ScreenFlow is 2.0.1 which fixes a few things some may be alluding to.
CraigS
Telestream ScreenFlow Support Forum Moderator
Zettt on November 11th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
That’s not perfectly true. Camtasia uses SoundFlower, but ScreenFlow also depends on SoundFlower. They just don’t call it “SoundFlower”. They call it “Special Audio Driver”. SoundFlower is an audio driver. It’s possible to use the SoundFlower engine, rewrite it and install a new audio device which then can be used to capture system and software audio.
The application just automatically re-routes system audio through their custom SoundFlower device. (That’s what I think is possible with SoundFlower…)
BTW: Audio Hijack Pro and almost any audio capturing utility uses in some way SoundFlower.
cseeman on November 18th, 2009 at 12:39 am
Zettt,The developers of ScreenFlow wrote their own driver. Please don’t use conjecture as if it were fact.
Please read my tag below. I communicate with the developers regularly as I provide online support for ScreenFlow.
CraigS
Telestream ScreenFlow Support Forum Moderator