I did have some pages bleed onto the opposite page when I first started scanning, but that is another example of having to perfect one's technique. It's a matter of keeping the book wide open and applying the greatest pressure to the spine. I rarely get that bleed over anymore, but if I did I would catch it in my preproofing and for a mistake like that I would delete the two pages and do them over right on the spot. That is another matter that one learns. A lot of the mistakes can be caught in the preproof and the ones that are not will likely get caught in the spell check which I follow every preproofing with, but after doing this so many times one gets a feel for what is worth correcting that way and what will be easier to just delete and rescan. By the way, a lot of things do still get past me, so it is not like my scans can do without proofreading. In fact, when I upload the book I get to the page that tells me how many unique misspellings are in my book and I always click the link to skim through the list of them and often I see scannos that I really wonder how they got past me. By that time, though, I consider it to be too late. The proofreader has to take care of those. Also, I use Open Book for both scanning and editing, so there is not as much that I could do if I was using a full fledged word processor. That means that I leave font size adjustments up to the proofreader too. However, whatever jobs the proofreader has to do with my scans I am sure that they are considerably better than my first scans.
On 12/10/2014 9:34 PM, Cindy Rosenthal wrote:
I no longer scan (sadly, because I really liked providing books for people and finding books and authors I'd never have known about if they hadn't been requested) but when I did it had to be a page at at a time me because of the kind of scanner I had Bit as proofer I've had scans that had been done 2 pages at a time have the second page bleed over onto the first page; disconnecting them is like untying a shoelace knot (none of hese were yours, Roger) soi f you try that, be carefulGod luck; as Roger says it's probably a good idea to have another scanner CindyOn Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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.