Jeff H,
"...reading is the most inefficient way to learn"
In the absense of a full-time, affordable, spoon-feeding Mentor, what else is there? And if all the Chosen Ones Mentors are Mentor-ing, and not producing CAD work, then the world is deprived of the best CAD drafters.
I see a trend in this thread. The posters that think it's impossible to learn C3D without "Training" consider themselves to be that indispensable "Mentor". And that makes you stuffy, pedantic, and pompous.
Dave
While everyone has a different learning style, and one size does not fit all, reading a vendor manual or perusing help docs is probably not the most effective method of learning a complex topic that covers multiple disciplines. Some people do ok with videos, others prefer 3rd party books, but all of the possibilities will work better at imparting knowledge if there's a knowledgeable human being available to intervene when needed. If skipping the human part of that formula is your preference -- fine.
And, while I can understand a level of frustration at being out of work for several years, and trying to get into a new field, there's not a lot of reason for hostility or bashing. The closest thing to an official 'chosen one' would probably be the Autodesk Expert Elites -- AFAIK there are at least 5 of them who browse the swamp, and none of them are deserving of the negativity. If you chose not to go for formal or other education in survey theory and practice, and instead rely on vendor Help, that's not their fault, and they will offer to answer questions and offer the lessons they've learned.
You're also making the elementary mistake that the ability to do something well somehow translates into the ability teach something well. Certainly a teacher needs subject matter expertise, but he needs to have some pedagolgical skill as well. Over the years I've known many good 'doers' who really really sucked at imparting knowledge downhill. And many instructors who taught the courseware and only the courseware. Instructors who can both do well, and teach well, are not always easy to find, but worth it.
I may sound pedantic, that's somewhat of a necessity in technical conversations, but stuffy and pompous? nahhhh...
Cadtag,
"...the help files for any software package are inherently limited..."
Really? And how, exactly, would you know that?
a) by having written a few.
b) by having read a _lot_ of them. good ones help and explain, bad one lead readers down a recursive rabbit hole. & even the best are written with gaps and rushed to get out the door. Just for fun try to learn the FDOT2014 C3D "Way" by using their Help, and see how long it takes to get a set of interchange plans produced.
"an online html page really is not the same thing as an experienced instructor who can clarify, explain, and expand on the docs."
Sniff! And when Cadtag looked upon the breadth of his CAD domain, he wept, for there were no more worlds to conquer.
Dave
Good classical reference, but I'm no Alexandar -- I always have more to learn and try to understand. I'm hardly so blinded by my own brilliance that I can't see the known unknowns (QTO in C3D for an example of something I know I don't know). and there are always the unknown unknowns -- the thing you don't even know that you don't know. Perfect example: today I learned about a command to manage the display of PDF layers in an attached PDF. Help file would not have been of any use in that, simply because I would not have known to go looking for the command. That capability was an unknown unknown this morning; this afternoon it's a known known.