Moving from Audio only to Video?

[cseeman]

Personally I think Wirecast has much deeper compositing capabilities. It also seems to use less CPU resources.
Given that each shot can have 7 layers and then there are 5 master layers on top of that, one can layer by shot which is composited or layer on master layers, which allows independent layer control. Also Desktop Presenter carrying video and audio over LAN from any computer is major useful.

[Amnon]

Personally I think Wirecast has much deeper compositing capabilities. It also seems to use less CPU resources.
Given that each shot can have 7 layers and then there are 5 master layers on top of that, one can layer by shot which is composited or layer on master layers, which allows independent layer control. Also Desktop Presenter carrying video and audio over LAN from any computer is major useful.

So maybe you can do a show about WireCast and show us how to use it? (or something like what Tom is planing to do with VB). I tried to use wirecast many times and still can't figure it out. Vidblaster was very easy to start using.

[cseeman]

I'm sympathetic with the challenges of learning Wirecast.
Telestream does have some stuff to help
A Blog
http://blogs.telestream.net/wirecast/

Wirecast YouTube channel
http://www.youtube.com/user/WirecastTube?feature=watch

a streaming show called WireastHelps. The shows also are on TheTechBuzz's YouTube channel
http://www.youtube.com/user/thetechbuzz/featured

They'll appear here as well
http://www.thetechbuzz.net/shows/wirecast-helps/

and Live here on most Thursdays as Stephan Heywood hosts along with Telestream's Eric Norrell
http://www.thetechbuzz.net/live/

and the basic Telestream tutorials
http://www.telestream.net/wire-cast/demos.htm

I've done some presentations on Wirecast in NYC area and will probably do more.

[TomSinclair]

@ Amnon: You were already on the top of my list!

@ RadarGaming & cseeman: Maybe we need to do a show about VidBlaster and Wirecast and demonstrate the excellent features of each.

[Amnon]

I'm sympathetic with the challenges of learning Wirecast.
Telestream does have some stuff to help

I looked at some of the tutorials in the past, nothing came out of it. I spent way too many hours trying to figure it out, nothing. Well, this afternoon I had an almost one-on-one with Joe de Max, and in no time (well, an hour or two) I began to grasp the basis of WireCast. I am a long way from actually changing to it, but at least I can now play with it and configure it to do what I need. Tutorials are done by experts who start off with the notion that the user has basic knowledge of what they are talking about. When you use VidBlaster, the ideas and principals of WireCast are hard to grasp. Joe made it easy to understand.
Thanks again Joe :-)

[andrewzarian]

They both have pros and cons. From personal experience I believe that Vidblaster is a better Camera Switcher. Wirecast on the otheris a much better encoder

[TomSinclair]

Amnon, I'm just hoping we don't lose you to the dark side.

[Amnon]

Amnon, I'm just hoping we don't lose you to the dark side.

I don't know that I would call it the "Dark side" as long as people like you are part of it Tom :-)
Like I said, I am a long way from being able to switch.

[cseeman]

They both have pros and cons. From personal experience I believe that Vidblaster is a better Camera Switcher. Wirecast on the otheris a much better encoder

I'm curious why you feel VidBlaster is a better camera switcher. Perhaps we can start another thread or add it to Wirecast VidBlaster thread. As noted before, I feel Wirecast is a better compositor although obviously that's only part of switching aspect.

[MeatballCB]

I experimented with both about a year ago and basically came to the following conclusion.

Vidblaster has a much easier learning curve, is much easier to use. Entry level with this is cheaper (~$195), but the limitations on modules per version could really hurt depending on what you want to do. You can use up those 7 modules in the Home version really easily with even a one person show. For example, to do a basic show with one person/shot, you use one module for the video, one for audio, one for any screen effects/lower thirds and one to record.

Wirecast has a much steeper learning curve, but seems a lot more powerful/feature rich. Higher cost of entry ($450), but you have the capability for virtually unlimited shots/setups. In comparison, Vidblaster pro costs $495, but still limits you to 15 modules.

If/when we decide to go video, I'm going to go with Wirecast just to avoid the whole problem with running out of 'modules'. In my mind I'd rather pay a little bit up front to get the more powerful and less limited program.

Of course, take everything I've said with a grain of salt, this was all back in early 2011, so there may have been upgrades/changes to one or both programs since then.