From watching the two movies it is clearly the Wink movie that is more complex because there are more changes in screen contents in the Wink movie. Also the Wink movie was recorded with a gradient Title Bar that also increases the size. Finally the Wink movie could be smaller by reducing the number of colours (by adding a palette to the Wink project). I did a quick test trying to mimic the BBFlashback movie as much as possible (with textboxes and pauses) and got a 275 KB file from Wink. Still not as small as the BB Flashback movie but certainly much more comparable.
I didn't even note that and had to look in the settings why there is no gradient title bar. I recorded both movies on the same computer and saved the files in 32 bit. Flashback was configured to disable graphic effects while recording, that's why there is no gradient title bar.
mistakes during recording since everything is recorded and not just screenshots of actual actions.
It's truly a matter of taste. I rather erase some frames and re-record the mouse movement, than inserting screenshots I forgot.
In fact, if you keep in mind you can easily erase whole parts, I redo screen operations while recording. I just do the same again, and later erase the whole section where I messed up. The time bar in Flashback allows precise editing.
While Wink can do continuous (timed) capture it is not in the same league as either Camtasia or BB Flashback in this regard and this is also not the goal of Wink. The best/smallest projects with Wink are done with input-driven capture that automatically captures screenshots for each key press and mouse click.
True, I read here several times now Wink is not designed for live action capture. So my sample isn't a good example for Wink. Also it's not optimized and not showing anything Wink can really do. It's just a tiny sample. Nothing more.
If someone volunteers to do a proper Wink 2.0 sample, I'll gladly replace my link + even offer server space.
The afterwards editing of a project is easier in a framebased project than a continuous captured project.
Guess we won't agree. ;-)
I've been using Wink 1.5 for a long time and then I got Flashback. As someone who knows both worlds, I've to say it's easier in Flashback. But then, I've used Wink the wrong way. Input-driven capture was too much work, so I eventually started using timed-capture only.
It is impossible to do simple edits of cursor position in both Camtasia and BB FlashBack.
Can't speak for Camtasia, but Flashback allows changing the cursor position.
I find Wink 2.0 more powerful than BB Flashback in both the editing and interactivity part
Interactivity, yes. But it's a power user feature, too complicated for the masses. A "pause" is all I need.
Editing? Again, each to it's own. I say no. Wink 1.5 got quite a ressource hog with larger projects, editing got a pain. Also it's not quite easy to insert another Wink movie. Did Wink 2.0 improve?
And the price of Wink can't be beat as already mentioned
Agree 100%.
Anyway, my last words about this:
Wink is a great freeware. For me right in the same league as Autohotkey or StrokeIt. And if I wouldn't have won Flashback, I'd be still using Wink.
For small projects and framed capture (screenshots) with some interactivity, it's the best there is. For live action it just can't compete with Flashback/Camtasia, at least not now... but these applications cost $200! No freeware should be compared with high priced applications, but people do. I guess this alone shows how good Wink is. Perhaps Wink will improve in the most important aspect: smooth videos/live action. Then it would rule. Now with audio recording/editing it probably beats middle priced solutions like Flashback Express/Snag It...
