Re: FWD: Is multi-tasking dead?

[Kevin McLauchlan <KMcLauchlan -at- CHRYSALIS-ITS -dot- COM>]

I've always enjoyed doing the variety of tasks that comprise
the project of making a doc.  In olden times (late eighties),
I worked for a division of Philips, where we had a group of
tech writers, a couple of graphic art folk (one technical
illustrator kidnapped from the aircraft industry, and one
graphic designer who could not only draw, but had flair and
imagination for design), and a translation group.

The writers researched, wrote, used the early (GEM version)
Ventura to desktop publish (and later, Interleaf), edited,
wrestled with (er, I mean co-ordinated with) the other groups
in our department, and even dealt individually with the wiley
printing house.

While some were reduced to making hand gestures, or to
placing the salt-shaker and the serviette-holder and the
coffee-creamer just-so, to convey their illustration wishes,
some of us just sketched what we wanted and the illustrator
would nod, grunt and produce a masterpiece within a day
or two.  I got to where I could produce a freehand sketch
that the illustrator could almost ink-in on the spot.

At a later job, I did all my design, text and layout in Quark
on a Mac and all my own illustrations with a AutoCAD.

These days, as a permanent, full-time employee (and the
entire doc department), I do everything I can in
FrameMaker, but am reduced to producing "illustrations"
in Visio.  Fortunately, not many illustrations are required,
because the program is simply not made for the job (but
that's the "graphics" program the engineers use, and for
which we have paid-up licences, so....).

So, two things:

1) No, multi-tasking is not dead, you're just looking for it
   in all the wrong places.

2) What do people recommend as an illustration tool, if I
want to do things like depict pieces of computer equipment,
show cable routing and connector placement, show
realistic-looking views of cable adapters and terminators,
cards, and so on?  Photos don't do it for me. I like to draw.
I prefer doing wire-frame and then filling in surfaces and
shading, but if there's a newer, better way I'll try it.
Vector-based is a must.  Cost is an issue, because I intend
to buy it out-of-pocket for home use, and then dazzle/shame
my employer into purchasing a tool, based on what I
produce at home and /s/l/i/p/ import into my next doc.

boss: "Jeez, Kevin, this looks great.  So [smugly] you've
         finally learned how to use Visio, eh?  No more
         pestering me for a 'real' draw program?
kevin: "Hah!  This was produced in FabulousCAD 3D,
         with rendering module. Here's what it would
         look like from Visio [both protagonists wince and
         retch, briefly].  Now, which one do you
         want representing the company? Hmm?"

I've had one suggestion, that I'm checking out. Anybody
else, please?  (Oh, and the one that was suggested has
-- of course -- a web site that didn't appear when I
searched Yahoo, AltaVista, HotBot, for "draw", "CAD",
"illustrate"...  So, there must be other URLs worth trying.)

Any help or advice... etc., etc.


Kevin McLauchlan
kmclauchlan -at- chrysalis-its -dot- com    (aka  kevinmcl -at- netrover -dot- com)
Journeyman techy writer, duffer skydiver, full-time unrepentent chocoholic

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Donald R. Stovicek [SMTP:usadad -at- RAEX -dot- COM]
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 1999 5:48 PM
> Subject:      Re: FWD: Is multi-tasking dead?
>
> Anonymous User wrote:
>
> > Name withheld upon request. Please reply on list.
> >
> > *************************************************
> >
> > Question: Is multi-tasking dead?
> >
> > I work for a large company in a documentation group that uses
> formatters,
> > editors, graphic artists, writers, and recently SMEs who can't do any of
> > the above.
>
> Based upon my experience, "multi-tasking" as you describe it is growing by
> leaps and bounds. It seems to me that up until about five years ago,
> publishers
> compartmentalized every process from writing, typesetting, illustration,
> layout, etc. Today, smaller (less than 50 employees) companies have their
> tech
> writers not only writing, but also layout and illustration. Large
> publishing
> houses seem to be moving in that direction as more and more burden is
> placed on
> the tech writer.
>
> I have seen an ever increasing number of help-wanted ads that are looking
> for
> technical writers with desktop publishing and illustration experience.
> Coincidently, I have lately seen quite a few ads for Graphic Artists who
> must
> have some writing and/or editing skills.
>
> It's a mixed bag in my opinion. As a WRITER, I do like the increased
> control I
> have over layout and illustration. Yet, I am NOT trained as a graphic
> artist or
> illustrator, so I believe my end product suffers as a result of adding
> these
> functions into my job description.
>
> From a management perspective, I do NOT believe the current trend is cost
> effective. Why have a $50,000/yr technical writer also doing the job of a
> $35,000/yr graphic artist, and a $20,000/yr illustrator and keyliner?
>
> IMHO, if I owned my own publishing house, I would want my technical
> writers
> spending as much time on writing as possible. I wouldn't want to pay a
> $50,000
> tech writer to perform the tasks of lesser paid individuals.
>
> --
> LOU
> Win friends and influence enemies.
> Start the day off with a FREE laugh!
> http://members.tripod.com/~LaffsOnUs

 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=