A tale of two Screencasts: How to suck less at Screencasting
Posted by Jeff December 13, 2007
Recently I came across two Python editing environments, Reinteract and Hotwire. The screencasts could not be more different. It’s instructive to consider what makes a superior screencast.
Before I pontificate, what makes my opinion worth listening to? I have an eye for video - I am a top contributor to VideoSift. My screencasts on ShowMeDo have been well reviewed.
Dislaimer: I know nothing about the two projects beyond having seen these screencasts. Also, Hotwire lead Colin Walters notes that the Hotwire screencast is fan-made; an improved official vid may be in the works.
Let’s deconstruct these examples to figure out: makes a screencast suck or succeed?
Audio
Hotwire uses a hard-rocking song. The soundtrack is irrelevant to the action onscreen, and distracts. Currently a single YouTube comment asks for the song title.
Reinteract is narrated by the developer. He knows his stuff and his clarity of speech conveys precision. The pacing feels right.
Video
Hotwire is presented in what Yahtzee has dubbed TeenyWeenyEyestrainoVision. Youtube’s stingy real estate obliterates detail. Add AutoPanning and Beryl fx for added wooziness.
Reinteract is clean and sharp. No other distracting windows or desktop. Video is full size; details are preserved. The entire screencast takes place in one window. Overall: clean, simple, focused.
Pacing / Narrative
Hotwire has so many distracting elements it’s impossible for an outsider to follow. After 30 seconds of squinting, I gave up. Hotwire may have fantastic features.. this video does not communicate them.
Reinteract has a coherent, well structured progression. The narrator explains features, benefits, and builds complexity. As a viewer I see what makes it cool and useful and how I might apply it
Summary
The purpose of Screencasts is to communicate concepts. Show the Sizzle. Principles of writing apply: dump anything that doesn’t contribute. Audio should be on topic. Video should be sharp, fullscreen, with no distractions. YouTube is a poor choice. Pacing and narrative should set a context, deliver benefits, and communicate something new and useful.
When done right, screencasts can communicate cheaply and effectively to a worldwide audience.
Hi Jeff. As co-founder of ShowMeDo I’ve seen my fair-share of screencasts (about 400 at the last count!). You’re absolutely on the money.
Personally I favour 5-10 minute videos with well-paced speech, clear audio, no distractions (e.g. no music!), with large clear fonts and no jerky on-screen distractions.
Screencasts should be a pleasure to follow, easy to watch and the main points should clearly be in your head by the end of the video.
The author’s voice is important too - it should be enthusiastic and the author should be enjoying the process. Dull, monotonic voices or corporate guff comes right through and puts the viewer off.
Cheers for sharing your thoughts!
Ian.
Thanks Ian. Good point about enthusiasm.
One should note though that the Hotwire author didn’t make that YouTube video - it was made by some random guy who wanted to show off his desktop.
Hopefully I’ll get some time soon to make an actual screencast myself.
Ah, thanks Colin. I’ll link to it when you have something.