annoying rear screen info

The very best way to learn something is usually to teach somebody else, since then you really need to think about how it works, or you can't teach it. It's also a lot easier to show somebody rather than describe something in writing, but it's not always that you have any choice.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #15105148
Reading manuals or viewing tutorials has always been especially frustrating for me.

The way I learn best, and also easiest, is to have someone show me how to do it. The old fashioned way - in person! Yes, a real live person sitting down with me and doing something, explaining what they are doing every step of the way. Then they let me try to see if I got it or not.

Am I alone, or is this not the best, fastest, and easiest way to learn something? When I learn this way, the lessons 'stick".

Whenever I do go thru the excruciating process of reading a manual, even when I eventually figure something out, I often have little retention.

That's pretty obviously going to be best: a teacher with a 1:1 ratio to students? Kind of expensive.

waterrockets wrote in post #15105166
That's pretty obviously going to be best: a teacher with a 1:1 ratio to students? Kind of expensive.

Oh, I don't mean a paid tutor, just a buddy or acquaintance that has the same camera.
Friends help each other out with this stuff all the time, don't they?

Unfortunately, among my friends, somehow I'm the expert!?!

Lowner wrote in post #15103955
Elie,

Someone had to say it I suppose!

Believe me I do try, but I quickly loose the will to live trying to get anything useful out of Canon manuals.

And spending a week being annoyed with the camera and frustrated because you couldn't fix a simple setting was better?

Tom Reichner wrote in post #15105148
Reading manuals or viewing tutorials has always been especially frustrating for me.

The way I learn best, and also easiest, is to have someone show me how to do it. The old fashioned way - in person! Yes, a real live person sitting down with me and doing something, explaining what they are doing every step of the way. Then they let me try to see if I got it or not.

Am I alone, or is this not the best, fastest, and easiest way to learn something? When I learn this way, the lessons 'stick".

Whenever I do go thru the excruciating process of reading a manual, even when I eventually figure something out, I often have little retention.

You're not alone, Tom I definitely learn better that way, too.

A user manual is a man's best friend, but why do we feel like we are admitting defeat by having to read it

L.J.G. wrote in post #15105514
A user manual is a man's best friend, but why do we feel like we are admitting defeat by having to read it

No clue. I've spent my life around engineering and computer systems, so reaching for the manual and documentation is just something that feels natural to me. I always find time to skim through them to hit the key notes, but generally I feel it is a failure on the developer's part if I have to keep reaching for the manual for stuff. (Looking up details in docs is different. I can't remember all the parameter options on hundreds of functions across a few dozen libraries.)

And frankly, writing really good manuals is a hard task. I should know, I've co-written several manuals in the last few years. For military weapons systems... Several armed forces kept sending back our proposal and manuals because parts were 'too confusing', such as the power up sequence. Which is written on the units.

I work in a technical industry, and I have read and written a lot of procedures and I believe in the importance of written procedures and manuals. Because of that I believe that the easiest way to learn is by recieving interpersoal training. Anyone that refuses to read manuals, recieve instructions or resists recieving help is dooming themselves to a hard time learning. The two Canon guides I suggested, are both well written, the printing is larger and easier to read, there are better illustrations, and the information is more in depth. I have read the Canon's manuals, they are good, but not the be all end all of manuals. The field guides go a step further then the canon manual. -rick

Luckless wrote in post #15105747
No clue. I've spent my life around engineering and computer systems, so reaching for the manual and documentation is just something that feels natural to me. I always find time to skim through them to hit the key notes, but generally I feel it is a failure on the developer's part if I have to keep reaching for the manual for stuff. (Looking up details in docs is different. I can't remember all the parameter options on hundreds of functions across a few dozen libraries.)

And frankly, writing really good manuals is a hard task. I should know, I've co-written several manuals in the last few years. For military weapons systems... Several armed forces kept sending back our proposal and manuals because parts were 'too confusing', such as the power up sequence. Which is written on the units.

Me: Oh look a button!
Wife: dont do it..
Me: oops
Wife: Should have read the manual..

Shufu wrote in post #15106255
Me: Oh look a button!
Wife: dont do it..
Me: oops
Wife: Should have read the manual..

LOL, exactly. And if you install Magic lantern, then is an option under one of the menus that says 'Don't click me'.

I have to use every ounce of willpower not to select it.

apersson850 wrote in post #15105092
Canon's manuals are good. Consise, accurate and well organized.

I find them chaotic, very poorly organised. Plus they make assumtions about users understanding, a fault with far too many manuals, which should start and stay with the basics. The writer seems to assume that the user will naturally know how to implement a certain instruction and avoid saying something crucial. I see it all the time here, when "computer experts" are offering advise on how to make a piece of software behave itself.

As an ex RYA Yachtmaster Instructor, I found that its actually the physical doing of a certain "task" after an explanation that cemented it in peoples mind. Thats why they came sailing for 5 days before the examination, so that we had plenty of time to practise.

But I remember after someone has shown me, unlike reading it in the manual when it goes in one ear and out the other if I even manage to find something useful.

Lowner wrote in post #15107087
But I remember after someone has shown me, unlike reading it in the manual when it goes in one ear and out the other if I even manage to find something useful.

You read with your ear? That is some trick

I am the same, I spend ages looking something up in a manual or book and have real issues picking it up, I look at the same process on YouTube and Bob's your uncle.

Lowner wrote in post #15107076
I find them chaotic, very poorly organised. Plus they make assumtions about users understanding, a fault with far too many manuals, which should start and stay with the basics. The writer seems to assume that the user will naturally know how to implement a certain instruction and avoid saying something crucial. I see it all the time here, when "computer experts" are offering advise on how to make a piece of software behave itself.

I think a user's manual should assume that the user has the knowledge to make use of the features, in the interest of brevity. There are whitepapers and field guides to explain the "whys." Tutorials even. I don't want to parse through that nonsense when I'm trying to quickly remind myself what C.Fn IV-3 does.