Wirecast and VidBlaster are more different than they are alike, I think.
Wirecast is from Telestream, a major campany. VidBlaster from CombiTech, a one-man shop. Wirecast with a huge marketing budget, and a vast field of dealers/resellers. VidBlaster with a website, resellers and word of mouth. Wirecast slow to implement features but very professionally managed. VidBlaster adding major features sometimes as frequently as monthly, but more of a club led by a genuis coder.
Strenghts and weakness to both. Nice that they are different enough to have a real choice. Talk shows and churches don't care about instant replay. Sports broadcasters don't care about virtual sets.
__________________________________________________ ____
I forgot to mention that with VidBlaster I like being able to do everthing on one PC: take Skype calls, stream three streams, record, etc.
Another feature that many folks think is important is RTMP/RTSP support.
Last edited by TomSinclair; 04-16-2012 at 02:07 PM.
Hey Tom Its great seeing you here. One thing that has bugged me is that the latest version of Skype does not work with Vidblaster. Currently the last Version that works is 4.2.187. From what I know Wirecast will support VVD (Virtual Video Drivers) in its next Major release. VVD is a very important feature in Vidblaster but if Wirecast implements it in its software many people will make the jump over. I am hoping Mike can work with Skype in getting this issue sorted out.
I can only talk about Wirecast.
At first I had a bit of learning curve understanding the interface. It didn't look like a typical "broadcast" software. To be honest Vidblaster looked more appealing.
As soon as I started to understand the capabilities in Wirecast, I learn to love it more and more every day. It is awesomely flexible and no restrictions to number of shots. The layer logic is also very flexible allowing me to make a shot just the way I want.
Also Wirecast has an API that allow third party applications to interact with it. I've made s small program called "Wirecast Toolbox" (Windows) that allows me to change shots with a wireless numeric numpad.
As I'm doing everything in my shows, It's important to concentrate on the content and not the software.
Wirecast and Vidblaster are differentand I think that each one has good features. Vidblaster has an easy interface, replay module, playlist module but Wirecast has the capability to emulate a real DVE. Wirecast hasn't (yet) a virtual video device and it's a real problem but it has a great layout, the cost is lower than Vidblaster and the CPU is less stressed. Actually I bought Wirecast because I like the friendly support, while the owner of Vidblaster (Mike) has a very rude attitude. He's legitimated to do what he wants in his forum but, at the same time, following the market rules, the customers are legitimated to choose a competitor.
I just started using the vidblaster and really like it. the problem I have is my comptuer that is too slow. I would like to upgrade soon and try again.
Mike @ VidBlaster announced today that his next project is to develope a Virtual Video Device that works with Skype 5.0, Google Hangout, etc. Stay tuned!
Well, I hope it is ok to post this here. We've just joined IAIB as an Industry Provider and our software is called vMix which can be found on our web site http://www.vmix.com.au/
The main feature of vMix is the ability to switch multiple sources of HD video (cameras, videos etc) using low CPU and then record or stream it to the web.
So I thought it might be appropriate to include it in this poll. (Though my guess is many here have not heard of it before)
Of course its ok to post it. Welcome to the IAIB. Unfortunately I can not modify the post but Please if possible make a new thread highlighting the software. Im sure many of our members will be interested to learn more and have an open discussion with you in the thread.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by andrewzarian
Bookmarks