I find that reading manuals about computer application and other technical tools is never as instructive as actually getting hands on experience. Screencasting is great way to have someone illustrate exactly how to use these resources. While I read tips about how to make effective screencasts, they really did not sink in until I attempted to create one of my one.
I think I was most surprised by how much time it took to create a screencast. I had to familiarize by self with new applications, perform several different takes, and spend time editing and uploading the video.
I tried out Screenr after reading Vicki’s review and checking out PJ’s screencast. I really liked its simplicity and ease of use but I though I should check out something with more editing options. I decided to use SnapProX because it was Mac friendly and I thought it would be easy to edit with my iMovie software. It took awhile to get the hang of it but overall it was fairly simple. I liked ability to crop the screen. I also initially liked the option of having the camera follow the cursor but eventually decided that it was distracting. I did not taken to account the some of the more technical aspects, like what type of resolution would be best. I am not sure why but that while the original recorded version of my tutorial was nice and crisp yet the final output on YouTube was a bit blurry. I think the problem may have been when I Imported into iMovie. Editing and importing took more time than I thought.
I also learned it was important to know exactly who this screencast was aimed at. I had a general concept of explaining some features of Flickr but it was hard to decide where to start. I had to assume they had some familiarity but it was tricky imagining how much.
The simplest and most straightforward screencasts are the ones I liked best. This exercise made me realize that is tricky to pull this off. My original concept for the screencast would have been too long and complicated. During my practice runs, I realized I needed to have a much narrower concept to keep it to a brief three or four minutes.
Screencasting is hard work. I think it only makes sense for libraries to use them if they are confident they will meet a need of their users. I also realized its difficult to explain complicated things in an easily digestible amount of time. I can easily see creating a series of screencasts that explain different facets of Facebook or Flickr.
Great points, Brooke! It is
Great points, Brooke! It is important to know who your potential population is when you're creating a video. I think reference librarians likely have the best idea about what screencasts should be created for a library because they see the problems patrons encounter on a daily basis and what their research needs are.
I also know what you mean about choosing to use or not use the whiz-bang features that come with screencasting software. When I first started using Captivate, I made these huge videos (in MBs) because I used all of the cool features that captivate had to offer (full motion filming, etc.). Over time, I became much more judicious in my use of the special features because some were distracting and made the size of the exported file much larger. Simplicity is a good thing, but it takes time to learn how to distill something to its most basic elements.
I agree with lots of your
I agree with lots of your points. Especially the timing aspect. I used the same setup as you did - Snapz Pro X to capture, iMovie to edit. Importing each small file into iMovie to edit together actually took longer than the screencast itself!