Better Help

Any chance of some professional Technical Writer input, across all Help subjects? It’s a special art, writing Help like a skilled teacher, imagining what a new user needs, to rapidly understand an unfamiliar technology.

The very last people who ought to write Help, are the company’s own tech people. They have no idea what many users don’t know. Most software cos are very poor at this, American the worst, German sometimes brilliant.

For example, these are all that Help says about Component connectivity:

“Every two different components would have less (component connectivity) edges in-between.”"

“Component connectivity: Minimal connections with neighboring cameras/images.”

These are completely unhelpful, leaving so much unexplained, only making sense (just about) to someone who already understands.

As for Apical angle - Google hints only that it’s an angle measured at an apex - but its meaning in RC is undefined - “among neighboring cameras/images” is sloppy guess-ware (tho prob obvious if you already know!).

Similar throughout many of the Help topics.

How many hours, days, weeks probably, at what cost, multiplied by how many new users, trying to make out what RC’s rich feature set all means? Poor RC Help has cost its users a fortune.

I tend to agree with Tom, even though it is understandable that not everything can be done at the same time.

It was ok during beta, but now there is no good explanation any more.

The terminology and workflows might be intuitive for professional photogrammetists (or however they are called) but since RC is also advertized to complete laypeople, they need to be able to understand it as well.