12% of ebooks are self-published; most are rubbish, claims editor

[Istvan diVega]

Grammer and spelling both, apparently.

[teh603]

Originally Posted by Istvan diVega

Grammer and spelling both, apparently.

Grammar went out with Said Books (since repetition and most other poetic devices are BAD and should never be used in prose). People write for effect now, not perfect grammar.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Josieb1

I read genre romance stories, and tbh whilst I am more than happy with the quality of both publisher and self published stories the majority of readers are too emersed in a love story with hopefully a happy ending to worry too much about grammer. Formatting is a bigger issue as we all want our ebooks to look good on whatever device we have, but grammer we are more forgiving on.

That's my problem, you see; for me poor grammar and spelling distracts so much from the story that I can't concentrate on it. I take the view that those things are a writer's toolkit, and a writer who doesn't know how to use their tools correctly really isn't worth reading. I actually see it as insulting to the reader for the author not to take the trouble to get them right.

[mattcurtis]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's my problem, you see; for me poor grammar and spelling distracts so much from the story that I can't concentrate on it. I take the view that those things are a writer's toolkit, and a writer who doesn't know how to use their tools correctly really isn't worth reading. I actually see it as insulting to the reader for the author not to take the trouble to get them right.

Agreed. And chances are that it the author hasn't taken the time to get those points right, than the book itself isn't probably very good.

[HomeInMyShoes]

12% seems a bit low of an estimate when I do searches for books. At least on the rubbish part.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

Neither is writing for a lot of us.

Then the writers need to act professionally and be willing to put in the time and effort to produce a quality product, and not act as though they're entitled to free help from other professionals.

[caleb72]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's my problem, you see; for me poor grammar and spelling distracts so much from the story that I can't concentrate on it. I take the view that those things are a writer's toolkit, and a writer who doesn't know how to use their tools correctly really isn't worth reading. I actually see it as insulting to the reader for the author not to take the trouble to get them right.

Amen.

[QuantumIguana]

I don't need someone to cut up my dinner for me, and I don't need a publisher to be a gatekeeper for me. It's not really all that difficult to filter out the crap for yourself. Most of the real crap fades away as soon as it is written. I can let other people be the guinea pigs, if others read it and enjoy it, it may be worth my time to take a look at it. I value word of mouth more highly than what critics say. If I feel I've been given sufficient reason to take a look, I'll look at the cover and blurb. If I'm still interested, I'll look at the sample. Self-publishing is here to stay.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by elcreative

As a matter of interest what would you call reasonable rates?

Editors like to make a living as well - so many people seem to ignore a simple fact that time is a most valuable commodity and if you want someone to use chunks of it on your behalf then it's not unreasonable for them to expect suitable remuneration...

Speaking as someone who has hired a number of editors, reasonable depends a lot on the skill and what I'm getting. There are a LOT of "editors" out there who think because they read a lot and notice errors that means they are 'editors.'

My preference is for an editor who breaks out services into different parts: Storyline, copyediting, and so on. Some editors also don't have the background to do storyline editing (and some don't know it) for every genre.

I pay more for someone who has experience in storyline editing than I will for copyediting (which is more of a learned skilled.) I've also hired an editor specifically for ... well, I guess you could call it word choice. Someone who can run through the document to make sure that my characters are not all talking the same -- they need quirks and they need their own vocabulary. Huntington, in the Sedona series, is a bit stuck-up. I don't want him to sound like Sedona or Brenda, Sedona's sister-in-law, etc.

I hired the word editor because after a run-through, it became obvious that it's easy for me to get stuck in the same old word choices that I am used to.
She helped me break a bad habit that I didn't even know I was forming!
Not that she picks words for me, but she is a devil for the details and if I say something like "This food is good." She is likely to write in the margin "Delicious, heavenly, awesome" She helps me take "plain Jane" and show me where Jane shows up in the same t-shirt too often.

That said, I am not one who wants to pay 1500 to 2500 for a package deal (This type of thing usually includes storyline, grammar, editing and a couple of passes.) The amount usually comes from someone who has at least done some magazine editing or editing via contract for a trad publisher. This does not mean they are any good at it--and you should always ask for a 3 to 5 page sample edit before hiring anyone unless they come recommended by someone you know.

Part of the problem is that there are editors out there who charge 750 for a package deal--for one pass that is supposed to catch everything. I've yet to meet one that can go through and make storyline comments and catch all the copyediting that needs to be done. But they are packaged that way most often.

Point being, I shop VERY carefully for what I pay for. I did tech writing in the industry for a few years so I know about how much time is spent per page for copyediting. I do storyline editing and I know how much time it takes.

The ones with a good rep charge more that is all there is to it. But editors and writers also have to have some rapport.

I pay what I can. That means some of it depends on sales. Some of my books have a word editor, a storyline editor and a copyeditor--three different people, along with 4 to 5 beta readers. Some of the earlier ones don't have a word editor. The last one I published, I couldn't afford the word editor, but it had a storyline editor and the copyeditor as well as several beta readers.

And I'm always shopping around. I am willing to try new people because editing is hard work and the prices tend to go up and up in the current environment.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Then the writers need to act professionally and be willing to put in the time and effort to produce a quality product, and not act as though they're entitled to free help from other professionals.

I'm not sure where you're getting that. I pay several different editors and have also paid artists. Most of the authors I know pay for at least one editor. I can think of one who...no, I take that back. She does her own copyediting, but she does hire a storyline editor.

There are a number of authors who don't get any editing help, but that is usually because they can't afford it--not because they expected it would be free and it turned out it wasn't. They know it costs something. They just don't always have the money. It's a choice like anything else.

[MikeB1972]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

I don't need someone to cut up my dinner for me, and I don't need a publisher to be a gatekeeper for me. It's not really all that difficult to filter out the crap for yourself. Most of the real crap fades away as soon as it is written. I can let other people be the guinea pigs, if others read it and enjoy it, it may be worth my time to take a look at it. I value word of mouth more highly than what critics say. If I feel I've been given sufficient reason to take a look, I'll look at the cover and blurb. If I'm still interested, I'll look at the sample. Self-publishing is here to stay.

The trouble with that is others may start to feel the same way, if no one is going to be first to read anything self-pubbed then it's back to the publishing houses as gatekeepers. I'll try a new TOR or Baen author, but I'm not going to be the first to take a punt at some new no-name self-pubber's first book, as soon as people tire of sorting through the slush pile you won't be getting any word of mouth recommendations on new authors, only established ones.

[jhempel24]

Originally Posted by HarryT

He's biased, plainly, but it's a fair point that traditional publishers do play a valuable role as "gatekeepers", in terms of filtering out the unreadable crap. That's why I personally generally stick with books from publishers - I don't have the time to find the gems that I'm sure do exist in the large garbage pile of indie books.

It's why 99.9% of the time I only accept books from publishers for review.

There may be one or two that I will accept, but for the most part, if it's not good enough to get the blessing of some publisher, it probably will be a bad review in which it will hurt sales anyway. So I'd rather not write it.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

I don't need someone to cut up my dinner for me, and I don't need a publisher to be a gatekeeper for me. It's not really all that difficult to filter out the crap for yourself. Most of the real crap fades away as soon as it is written. I can let other people be the guinea pigs, if others read it and enjoy it, it may be worth my time to take a look at it. I value word of mouth more highly than what critics say. If I feel I've been given sufficient reason to take a look, I'll look at the cover and blurb. If I'm still interested, I'll look at the sample. Self-publishing is here to stay.

So you're happy to let a bunch of unknown people with their own agendas be the gatekeepers, rather than the publishers whose function it is to find and produce marketable, popular, worthwhile books?

Personally, I don't trust Joe Nobody the Author's Shill to know more about good writing than the folks at Knopf.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

The trouble with that is others may start to feel the same way, if no one is going to be first to read anything self-pubbed then it's back to the publishing houses as gatekeepers. I'll try a new TOR or Baen author, but I'm not going to be the first to take a punt at some new no-name self-pubber's first book, as soon as people tire of sorting through the slush pile you won't be getting any word of mouth recommendations on new authors, only established ones.

I have. Usually when they are free, but I bought Karen Cantwell's book without knowing her or whether it would be good for 99 cents. I've tried numerous books via lendleme. I'd say I make it through 30 pages on about half of them.

But in fairness, I don't finish every trad book I buy or get from the library either. I think I am more likely to get a well-edited readable book from the library than lendlme OVERALL, but I utilize these resources for new authors in the same way for the same reasons.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

I'm not sure where you're getting that. I pay several different editors and have also paid artists. Most of the authors I know pay for at least one editor. I can think of one who...no, I take that back. She does her own copyediting, but she does hire a storyline editor.

There are a number of authors who don't get any editing help, but that is usually because they can't afford it--not because they expected it would be free and it turned out it wasn't. They know it costs something. They just don't always have the money. It's a choice like anything else.

See the post I was initially commenting on (#41). I interpreted that as a writer feeling rather entitled to free/cut-rate help from editors.