Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
Bulletin Board
>
Type of editor??
date
newest »
newest »
Um...every kind you can afford?It really depends on what you've written. There's no way to guess what your book needs.
Hi Preston, I have just finished my first novel and know exactly how you feel so want to offer some advice that might save you money. I learned the hard way :(Apologies in advance if I'm covering anything you already know here, but this is what I did...
I read it myself first. That's right - myself. You can upload any file to a Kindle, pull up a chair and read it like you would any book.
Then I'd got three beta readers to look at it and give me feedback. NOT friends. NOT family. NOT people that were afraid to hurt my feelings.
How do you find them? Ask via social media or here on Goodreads. Offer to read other writer's work in exchange. When you have at least three lots of feedback, then you have to sit down and rewrite again.
Then I got an editor to do a line by line edit & proofread. I used Flora Napier of Blueprint Editing in Edinburgh and she was wonderful. (flo@blueprintediting.co.uk)
Then I submitted to agents, got one and following this ended up doing about another twenty five rewrites.
Then I got twelve publisher rejections.
Then, I had a full manuscript feedback report done from Cornerstones.co.uk.
Then, (now as it happens) I began yet another rewrite. And when I've finished I have to go back to lovely Flo for a proofread- paying her twice.
So, in there somewhere (I think) is your answer. I do recommend a full report before the line by line edit if you can afford it. I sold my grannie for mine but I'm so glad I did it. It has transformed my work.
Hope this makes sense and is of some help.
I would recommend beta readers first also. They can point out plot holes and big picture things to fix. Then get the editor last. I'd want to give an editor the best possible piece so she's not pointing out stuff you already know.
Thanks, Heather. My process has been kind of similar thus far.I went a non-traditional way and went ahead and paid 3 Beta Readers for initial reviews of the work. Their feedback has been great and I paid them because I wanted to stick to a deadline. Going the free way wasn't turning up anything substantial or time-allotted, though I did nab one free one that did some great work.
I am still waiting for Beta Reads from two others but my process I think for the rest will be revisions from the Beta's, then a professional editor that will cost the most, then three more edits, then three more readers (one probably being a proofreader) and then those revisions and my own proofing, and finally find an agent and go from there.
It would be great to find an editor who does multiple jobs in one, like a package deal, but I'm really looking for editors who have specific experience in science fiction. I almost went with one that did mostly chic lit until I did my research and decided not to go with that editor.
I don't have the money to have it professionally edited five times for all of the different edits that I've seen.
Line-by-line and some content editing would be great.
I agree with Micah. If you can afford to have someone do a comprehensive edit- content editing, copy-editing, line-by-line editing...you should have the editor look at everything.
Is anyone willing to post how much this cost them?
Most of the editors I have seen and looked into offer a free consultation. Normally they will look at a certain number of words or pages for free and tell you what kinds of editing they recommend based on what they see. I would consider that, and also look to the feedback you got from the betas for clues. For example, if most of their complaints were lack of continuity, plot issues, character issues, etc then more in depth content editing will be what you're looking for.
Most of the editors I have spoken with (whose samples are outstanding) cost around $400-$800 dollars. Full editing is expensive and can be very time consuming. For a science fiction novel you may want to go all out with a line editor because that genre is so complex (depending on your type of novel) I also do beta reading, but you are right- if you want good feedback on a deadline- pay a beta reader. Good luck with your novel!
Betas, by definition, aren't paid. If you're paying them, they're editors. If you have specific needs that you can't fill through volunteers, there's nothing wrong with paying somebody, but they are not betas.A "content editor", and your "betas" should have filled this role, looks for plot and continuity issues and gives feedback on those. A copy editor looks at your "copy", the actual written work, and gives specific corrections and suggestions (the only significant difference between a copy and a content editor is that the content editor does not correct the copy--there is little that a content editor does that a competent copy editor doesn't). The line editor goes over the finished copy line by line, looking for remaining issues. And then finally, the proofreader checks for things like typos, homophones, missed punctuation, spelling errors, etc.
The other issue is, what are you planning to do with it? Are you self-publishing? Submitting? Shopping for an agent?
If you are self-publishing, you need to have "press-ready" copy, which involves multiple layers of editing. Far too many "indie" books are very far from that standard.
If you are submitting to a publisher or shopping for an agent, you need to have a polished ms but it does not need to be publication ready. "Polished" is a complete story, as free of plot and structural issues as you can manage, and also free of spelling and grammatical errors.
Some writers will pay an editor to go over it in that case, but many do not. I try to have betas look at them, and I will tell you that I have a better acceptance history with beta'd work, but I've never paid an editor. Whether it's money well spent or not is very subjective, and also depends on who you're sending it to. They are both looking for quality, but a small or e-house may be more forgiving of manuscripts with a couple of rough edges than a major agent is.
Any publishing house will insist on having their own editors in on the work, no matter how polished it is, so I would tend to be a little cautious about outlay if that's your aim.
Thanks, D.C. I think for my first book I'm going to bite the bullet and spend a bit, but not too much. I want my MS to be as good as it can be.
As Heather said from what I read, she got an agent and still had to edit, so I think the more edits a book has the better.
Preston wrote: "As Heather said from what I read, she got an agent and still had to edit, so I think the more edits a book has the better."Sometimes yes, sometimes no. There is such a thing as over-editing, although under-editing is more common. It certainly sounds like you think you could use a copy editor, and a good one can be money well-spent.
The thing with multiple edits is not that one person can't do it all (any editor you're giving your hard earned money to should be able to) but that multiple sets of eyes should be on the manuscript, because it is amazing how pesky some of these things can be. I recently read an author copy of my latest release, and I found several typos and a relatively minor grammatical error. This is after me, two betas, a copy editor, a line editor, a proofreader, whoever formatted the galleys, and me again.
Agreed. I've seen some typo's in major books. I don't believe any one book is typo or error free. It's just the nature of the beast. I read a popular blog online where the author goes through four rounds of Beta's, spread out over time of course. To me, that is way too much. But, this author self publishes, so I guess the more, the better. One thing that bugged me about the author's timeline is waiting one year to edit or even two to publish the book. Personally, I am all about deadlines and that seems too long to me. It seems to me the authors who are more successful publish at least one book a year, not every three or four.
I also think three editors or readers before the editor and three proofers/readers after the editor is sufficient, then let the Agent/publisher have the next say in the process.
Preston wrote: "Agreed. I've seen some typo's in major books. I don't believe any one book is typo or error free. It's just the nature of the beast. I read a popular blog online where the author goes through fou..."
I'd agree. The process for self pub is often a little different that it is for trad pub, but that's a long time frame, especially for a self-published book. I've had short stories go from glimmer in my eye to on sale at Amazon in about a week. Now, I can write one in a day sometimes, depending on length, so the rest of the time is waiting for the beta and letting it simmer before I take another pass or two.
My traditionally published books typically take eight months to a year, but I have more than one in the pipeline at a time. Frankly, I think volume is the key to financial success, at least in genre fiction, and assuming you can keep your quality up.
And yes, I think that's plenty of eyes on it.
I would think once you have a solid audience, there's no stopping you :D
It's a science fiction novel aimed at the twenties and thirties market. I've found some editors by looking through popular books and have some names to contact, but what type of editing should I look for? Content editing, copy-editing, line-by-line editing?