[bksvol-discuss] Re: Adventures in Proofreading

  • From: "Roger Loran Bailey" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx" for DMARC)
  • To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 20:14:41 -0500

Kim, you learn scanning pretty much the same way you learned proofreading. You just go ahead and do it and if you have specific questions as you go along you ask here. Your first attempts are likely not to be so good, but you adjust your settings and techniques as you go along until you get an acceptable scan. Then it is the same as proofreading. You try to get as perfect a copy as possible before sending it to be proofread and then the formal proofreading is just to check up on you to be sure that you didn't miss anything. Personally, I scan in two page mode and scan two pages at a time and preproof those two pages before going on to the next two. That way if I make a mess of things I can just rescan the two pages on the spot. If you try that yourself you might perfect your technique with just two pages. That is, just rescan the same two pages until you get it right and then you have a technique. Bear in mind that when you get to the next book you may have to adjust your technique a bit, but eventually you will learn the likely variations and that will become a technique itself. By the way, proofreaders considerably outnumber submitters right now and it keeps the checkout list depleted. If you can get over your scanning phobia it would help balance things out a bit.

On 12/10/2014 11:21 AM, Kim Friedman wrote:
Behold: innocent proofreader is reading through a nice little document until
coming across something strange. What is that thing? It's a surname with two
parts with a single letter, then a space and the second part of the name.
Both parts are capitalized. I have never encountered such a phenomenon dear
reader. Imagine my surprise. So I naturally make a nice little copy of said
phenomenon and the fun begins! I send a message to the submitter who
replies. Back and forth the messages fly until we've established that the
single letter is supposed to be accented. But what sort of accent I ask?
Being told how it looks doesn't mean a thing to me since I've always read
Braille. I write back. Is it a tilde, a circumflex, an umlaut, an accent
grave, or an acute accent? The response comes: the accent is not a tilde,
umlaut, circumflex, or a grave accent. It's like the word déja vu.
Fortunately for me, I had taken a course in French so I had a pretty good
idea of what was wanted. Light goes off in my head and I write back: Is what
we're looking for an acute accent? I am requested to show an example of the
acute accent. Bingo! I am informed that is the very accent. Now the question
arises: is said accent supposed to be for a capital letter or for a small
letter. I end up writing again showing an acute accent with a capital and
one without. Through much persistence, we have finally settled on the
definitive answer: said accent should be capitalized. Sometimes proofreading
requires a bit of detective work, especially if you come across a word
you've never encountered or something like what I've just mentioned. I know
there are those who would rather suffer the torture of a thousand cuts than
doing any sort of proofreading. They'd prefer to scan documents which is
great for me since I'm a scanophobe (or to be more precise, intimidated by
the whole idea of scanning). (I would be willing to give it a try if there
was someone there who would show me how to go about it, to know the sorts of
settings I should use, and if I had a scanner which could be used with
whatever book I might use. (The one I've got would probably do great for a
paperback book but not for something larger. (It's a Cannon LIDE-90. (I have
no idea how this one rates with submitters, but should like to know.) So I
am perfectly contented to let others do the submitting while I do my bit to
make sure those files are proofread the best way I know how so the file will
be a pleasure to read. (I get to read the file before anyone else does and
when I send it up, I can deliver my honest opinion about the perfidy of
publishers leaving in typos, the great scan by the submitter, and anything
else that needs remarking upon. (I've yet to just send something up without
commenting on it.) So all of you who are starting out proofreading, I wish
you much success in your endeavor to make the submitter's file look great.
As you continue, you'll get more and more proficient, and if you're a
deranged perfectionist, then you are the best type of proofreader in my
opinion. You will read every single word. You will be particular about how
many pages are actually in the file and what text belongs on what page.
You'll want everything to look nice, and you will probably be bugged by
publishers leaving in errors because it will offend you because you'd love
to get rid of it if you were only allowed. You will no doubt leave comments
and you will have a sense of accomplishment that the file is finished, sent
up, and approved. So here is to deranged perfectionists of every stripe,
whether they are submitters, proofreaders or those who could do both
scanning and proofreading. Regards, Kim Friedman.

  To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to
bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line.  To get a list of 
available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line.


To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to
bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line.  To get a list of 
available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line.

Other related posts: