Scopic vs Scrintal
You can draw connections. You cannot read them.
Scrintal gives you a visual canvas for your cards and lines. Scopic turns those lines into records: named, typed, openable, queryable.
Join waitlistScopic map view
Screenshot: Scopic map view
Connections named and typed. Open any one as its own record with properties and notes.
Scrintal canvas view
Screenshot: Scrintal
Visual cards connected by lines. The lines themselves carry no data and cannot be opened.
In Scrintal, a connection shows that two cards are related. In Scopic, a connection says how they are related, what that relationship carries, and what else belongs to it.
What it gets right
Scrintal understands that knowledge lives in the space between notes, not just inside them. The canvas-first approach puts spatial thinking at the centre rather than treating it as a secondary view over a list of documents. Cards are full documents — they can hold rich text, images, and embedded content.
The interface is clean and well-considered. Creating a card, moving it, linking it to another card — these actions all feel natural. For writers and researchers who think better when they can see everything laid out spatially, Scrintal gets a lot right.
Where it stops
The connections in Scrintal are lines. They show that two cards are linked but carry nothing about why, how, or under what conditions. You cannot name a connection, give it a type, set a date on it, or open it. Two cards can be connected in a hundred different ways — funding, opposition, collaboration, causation — and Scrintal represents all of them identically.
There is no database view. The spatial canvas is the only way to see and interact with your content. You cannot filter your cards by property, sort them by date, or query a subset. The visual is the whole product.
Name what the connection means
In Scopic, every connection is a record. Name it 'Funds', 'Challenges', 'Reports to'. Add a date, a source, a confidence level. Open any connection and it shows its own properties alongside the two things it links. In Scrintal, a line between two cards is a visual mark. It stores nothing.
Screenshot: named connection open, showing type and properties
Filter by what connections mean
In Scopic, every connection type is queryable. Show only connections named 'blocks', or 'funds', or 'supports'. Filter the map to a single relationship type and see the network it creates. The database holds every connection as a row you can sort, group, and open. In Scrintal, there is no filter.
Screenshot: map filtered to one connection type
Database view alongside the map
Scopic gives every element a row in the database. Sort by any property, filter by connection type, open any element as a page with its full connection list. The map and the database are two views of the same underlying data — not separate representations. Scrintal has no database view.
Screenshot: database view showing elements as sortable rows
What people say
Scrintal was the closest thing I'd found to how I think. Scopic is closer. The difference is whether the connections themselves mean anything. In Scrintal they don't.
2 weeks ago
I kept drawing the same kinds of connections in Scrintal and wanting to label them. Moved to Scopic and the first thing I did was name every connection type in my project. Changed how I saw the whole structure.
1 month ago
Scrintal: beautiful canvas, no structure. Scopic: beautiful canvas, real structure underneath. I wanted both.
3 weeks ago
The thing I couldn't do in Scrintal was ask 'show me only the funding relationships'. In Scopic that's one filter. That's the whole difference.
2 months ago
Built a concept map in Scrintal and realised I had no way to see all the 'causes' relationships at once. Moved to Scopic. Now I can.
6 weeks ago
Scrintal is where I draft. Scopic is where I think. That difference became clear after about a week of using both.
3 months ago
At a glance
| Scopic | Scrintal | |
|---|---|---|
| Connections you can name and describe | ✓ | — |
| Add custom properties to a connection | ✓ | — |
| Filter the map by connection type | ✓ | — |
| Database view of all elements | ✓ | — |
| Open a connection as its own page | ✓ | — |
| Map as a primary working space | ✓ | ✓ |
| Cards as rich-text documents | ✓ | ✓ |
| Page view for each element | ✓ | ✓ |
| Local-first storage | — | — Cloud only |
See what named connections change.
Join waitlistScopic vs Scrintal
You can draw connections. You cannot read them.
Scrintal gives you a visual canvas for your cards and lines. Scopic turns those lines into records: named, typed, openable, queryable.
Join waitlistIn Scrintal, a connection shows that two cards are related. In Scopic, a connection says how they are related, what that relationship carries, and what else belongs to it.
At a glance
| Scopic | Scrintal | |
|---|---|---|
| Connections you can name and describe | ✓ | — |
| Add custom properties to a connection | ✓ | — |
| Filter the map by connection type | ✓ | — |
| Database view of all elements | ✓ | — |
| Open a connection as its own page | ✓ | — |
| Map as a primary working space | ✓ | ✓ |
| Cards as rich-text documents | ✓ | ✓ |
| Page view for each element | ✓ | ✓ |
| Local-first storage | — | — Cloud only |
See what named connections change.
Join waitlist- Connections you can name and describe ✓ Scopic — Scrintal
- Add custom properties to a connection ✓ Scopic — Scrintal
- Filter the map by connection type ✓ Scopic — Scrintal