A Loom alternative for written, scannable feedback

Yes, CobaltCapture is a free, browser-based alternative to Loom for written feedback. No desktop app, no extension, no signup. The output is a clean review, a public URL plus one-click markdown, PDF, and Word exports, that a reader can scan in 30 seconds and an AI coding agent like Cursor or Claude Code can ingest directly.

Loom is async video communication. It's good at that job. The problem most Loom searchers actually have is not "I need a different video tool", it's "I need to give feedback faster and have the receiver act on it faster." A five-minute Loom takes five minutes to record and five minutes to watch. Often the receiver wishes they could just read it.

CobaltCapture is for the user who realized halfway through recording a Loom that they wished the engineer or stakeholder could just scan the feedback. Screenshots with voice transcripts and text commentary, exported as markdown, PDF, Word, or a public URL. No install, no signup, free.

What Loom is good at

Loom owns the async video category for a reason. The capture flow is one click, the webcam bubble adds tone and a face, and the resulting link plays in any browser without a download. For "explain this to someone who isn't in the meeting," nothing else is faster.

Three things make Loom hard to beat for human audiences. Tone and pacing carry information that text strips out. The webcam bubble builds rapport, which matters for sales and customer-facing work. And the playback experience is good, viewers can scrub, speed up, and react inline. If the next reader is a human who needs to see your screen and hear your voice, Loom is the right answer.

Where the approaches differ

Video assumes the receiver will watch end-to-end. A lot of feedback recipients won't. A developer wants to scan five findings in 30 seconds; a stakeholder wants to skim and reply with one decision. A linear video forces them to sit through the whole stream to find the part that matters to them.

The transcript path makes it worse, not better. Loom generates a transcript, but the transcript loses everything you gestured at. "Look at this button right here" reads as gibberish without the frame attached. To make the recording useful as a written artifact you end up retyping the content with screenshots inserted, you paid the cost of recording the video and then paid the cost of writing the document anyway.

And video does not survive the handoff to an AI coding agent. Cursor, Claude Code, Windsurf, and Codex are text-and-image systems. They cannot watch an MP4. Pasting a Loom URL into the composer hands the model a link string, not the visual content behind it.

How CobaltCapture is different

CobaltCapture runs in your browser. No install, no extension, no app. Open the page you want feedback on, open cobaltcapture.com in a new tab, click capture, pick the window. Drag a box around the part that matters. Hit dictate and talk through the issue out loud, the browser converts your speech to editable text next to the screenshot. Repeat for each finding, then publish.

The output is a public URL, plus one-click markdown, PDF, and Word exports. The artifact reads in 30 seconds: title, summary, one cropped screenshot per finding with paragraph context. The reader scans for the part relevant to them. A developer pastes the markdown into Cursor. An executive opens the PDF in their inbox. A teammate clicks the URL. Same review, every destination.

You also get a clean stakeholder URL at /s/<slug>, content only, no editing chrome, for handing to a client or executive.

When to use which

Use Loom when the reader is a human who will watch end-to-end and tone matters. Customer demos, sales walkthroughs, async standups, "here's what I'm thinking" videos for a teammate. The face and the voice are the point.

Use CobaltCapture when the value is the structured artifact, not the recording itself. Feedback that needs to scan in 30 seconds. Handoff to a developer who will paste it into Linear or GitHub. Handoff to an AI coding agent like Claude Code or Cursor. Any feedback session where you wished the reader could just read it.

Many teams keep both. Loom for the customer-facing video. CobaltCapture for the written feedback. They do not overlap once you separate them by reader.

Feature comparison

	Loom	CobaltCapture
Install required	Desktop app or Chrome extension	None (browser only)
Signup to start	Required	Not required
Output format	Video, embed	Markdown, PDF, Word, public URL
Output consumption time	Watch end-to-end	Scan in 30 seconds
Voice	Yes (video audio)	Yes (transcribed to editable text)
Screenshots	Frames from video	Cropped, numbered pins, source-stamped
Stakeholder-only URL	No	Yes (/s/<slug>)
AI-agent readable	Not meaningful	Native markdown
Pricing	Free tier plus paid plans	Free

The honest version

Most Loom searchers want Loom. They should use Loom. CobaltCapture is for the smaller group who realized they wanted text feedback with screenshots, not a video. The two products do different jobs. If you can describe what you need without the word "video," CobaltCapture probably fits better.

Product details and pricing change frequently. Check each vendor's site for the current state of their offering.

Get started

cobaltcapture.com, no install, no signup needed to try.

Related

• Scribe alternative
• Screen capture to markdown
• Agent feedback
• All comparisons

Frequently asked questions

Is CobaltCapture really a free Loom alternative?

Yes, for the written-feedback use case. CobaltCapture is free to use, free to share, and free to export. Unlimited captures, no trial countdown, no per-seat plan. The difference is the artifact: CobaltCapture produces a written review with screenshots and voice transcripts, not a video file.

Does CobaltCapture require a desktop app or browser extension like Loom?

No. CobaltCapture runs entirely in the browser using native APIs. No desktop app, no Chrome extension, no install of any kind. Open a tab, click capture, share the window you want to review.

Can I use CobaltCapture without signing up?

Yes. Anonymous capture and publish work without an account. Sign in later to keep reviews permanently and unlock editing.

Why pick written feedback over a Loom video?

Video assumes the reader will watch end-to-end. A lot of feedback recipients won't, a developer wants to scan five findings in 30 seconds, a stakeholder wants to skim and reply with one decision. Video also does not survive the handoff to an AI coding agent like Cursor or Claude Code, which cannot ingest an MP4. A written review with embedded screenshots covers both readers in one artifact.

When should I still use Loom instead of CobaltCapture?

Use Loom when the reader is a human who will watch end-to-end and tone matters: customer demos, sales walkthroughs, async standups, async meetings where the face and voice are the point. CobaltCapture is for the moment you wished the engineer or stakeholder could just scan the feedback.