Welcome to the DF Editorial blog. To kick things off, I thought I’d take a closer look at the publishing process. Specifically, I’d like to discuss the two main services that I offer through this website.
I’m referring, of course, to editing and proofreading.
What’s the difference?
When a client asks me to work on a new project, they’ll sometimes say they have a document that needs to be “proofread/edited”. At this point, I usually need to discuss the project in more detail and find out exactly what they need, because proofreading and editing are really quite separate tasks and each requires a different approach.
I thought it might be useful if I explained the differences, so that you’ll know what’s involved if you ever need to use the services of an editor or proofreader – or if you’re interested in doing one of these jobs yourself.
I’ve decided to look at proofreading first because it’s the more straightforward of the two tasks. In my next post, I’ll examine the role of the editor.
Hot metal and inky fingers
To understand what proofreading is all about, it helps to know a little about the publishing process.
Proofreading is one of the final steps before a book, magazine, newspaper or other publication is made available for sale or distribution.
Historically, the only format available to publishers was print – and each page of a publication had to be prepared by hand. A compositor (later called a typesetter) would have a frame the same size as the printed page, and inside this they would construct the lines of text using lots of small pieces of metal – one for each letter or punctuation point. If you’ve ever seen the hammers on an old-fashioned typewriter, you’ll have a good idea of what these looked like: each letter appeared as a raised shape on a little rectangle of metal.
The typesetter would look at the original manuscript and select each letter they needed to create an exact copy of it using these pieces of type. Once the entire frame was full, it would be coated with ink and pressed against a piece of paper to create the printed page.
The proof of the pudding
Now, I say “an exact copy”, but bear in mind that the entire page had to be set back to front, so that it would print the correct way when pressed against the paper. As you can imagine, this was not only a time-consuming process but also one that created many opportunities for mistakes.
So, instead of simply setting the type and then running off hundreds or thousands of copies, the printer would first produce just one set of pages for checking. These were called the proofs – “proof” here meaning “test”.
Enter the proofreader. The proofreader’s job was to look at that first set of pages and compare them with the original manuscript. If they found any errors, they’d mark them up using standard symbols so that the typesetter could correct them.
The proofreader’s job, strictly speaking
Today, typesetters use computers instead of pieces of metal, but proofreading – in the strictest sense of the word – remains the same job: it’s a detailed but rather mechanical process in which the original text that was sent to the typesetter is compared with the final pages, one word at a time (or, if you have to proofread in a language you don’t speak, as I’ve done on occasion, one letter at a time).
At heart, then, proofreading is not a creative task. It’s simply about ensuring the original text is copied over correctly.
Redefining the role...
The good news is that the switch to computers has greatly reduced the potential for errors to occur, because the typesetter now imports the original text as a complete file, rather than having to recreate it letter by letter. This is part of the reason why the proofreader’s job has now expanded.
Proofreaders still need to check that no text has gone missing during typesetting, and make sure that styles such as italic, bold and underlining have been applied correctly, but today they tend to act more as a “second pair of eyes” for the editor. In other words, they don’t just check that the document has been typeset correctly but also make sure that no errors have crept in during earlier stages of the process. This can happen when a lot of changes have been made by the editor, the author or the client as the text has been developed.
The proofreader will look for problems such as:
- Spelling mistakes
- Awkward grammar
- Inconsistencies in formatting
- Missing or incorrectly positioned graphics
- Inaccurate cross-references, and
- Perhaps even factual errors.
Sometimes, a proofreader will be asked to focus only on this second part of the process, rather than first checking that all of the content has been captured. This task is called a “blind proofread”, because the proofreader is checking the typeset pages without seeing the original manuscript.
... but proofreading is not the time to edit
All of this means that proofreading is sometimes seen as a “light” version of editing.
However, it’s important to understand that it remains a final check of the document at the very end of the editorial process: one last chance to catch any mistakes before the presses roll.
Proofreading is not the time to make anything more than very minor changes to the text, because doing so can be expensive and can have a serious impact on the publishing schedule. By the time we reach this point, the whole publication – text and images – will have been carefully laid out, contents pages generated and perhaps even an index produced. Disturbing any of this can mean that a lot of work has to be redone.
I speak from experience. As an editor, I once had to manually update an entire index after a client decided to change parts of a book at proofreading stage. Between checking all the page references, marking up the changes for the typesetter, waiting for the amendments to be done, and then making sure they’d been carried out correctly, it added a couple of days to the schedule.
Start at the beginning
For this reason, you shouldn’t wait until proofreading stage to make important changes to a document or send it to senior management for review. I can understand the desire to show them something that looks like a finished publication, but it’s far better to agree a final version of the content before it goes for typesetting and proofreading.
Also, if you’re sending something to an editorial department for the first time, it’s best not to assume that all it needs is to be proofread, even if you think the text is in good shape. If the text hasn’t yet been professionally edited, that’s what you’ll need to have done first.
Coming soon
You should now have a clearer picture of what proofreading entails.
But what about editing? What exactly does that involve? And how can an editor help you produce the best possible version of your text?
Read the next post in this series to find out!
