|
Good proofreading practice means acknowledging that changing one word, or moving one line, can have unintended and damaging consequences throughout the rest of the book if we aren’t careful.
What are page proofs?
If we want to proofread for publishers, packagers and project-management agencies, or if we're checking self-publishers' print-on-demand books, we need to be comfortable with working on page proofs.
The proofreader will usually be asked to work on page proofs. What are they?
Page proofs are so-called because they are laid out as exactly as they will appear in the final printed book. If all has gone well, what the proofreader is looking at will be almost what the reader sees if they were to walk into a bookshop, pull this title off the shelf and browse through the pages.
The layout process has been taken care of by a professional typesetter who designs the text in a way that is pleasing to the eye and in accordance with a publisher’s brief.
In this case, the proofreader does not amend the text directly. They annotate the page proofs.
You might be required to work on both hard-copy page and PDF page proofs – it will depend on the client’s preference. You'll be looking for any final spelling, punctuation, grammatical, and consistency errors that remain in the text. However, you'll also expected to check the appearance of the text. Checks will include the following:
This isn't a comprehensive list but it gives you an idea of how this type of proofreading goes beyond just checking the text for typos. If your client hasn’t supplied you with a proofreading checklist, you can access this free one when you sign up for The Editorial Letter. 
CLICK IMAGE TO ACCESS
What's important here is that every amendment you suggest might have an impact somewhere else. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t make the amendment; it means, rather, that you need to be mindful of the consequences of your actions – the knock-on effects.
What are knock-on effects?
Professional proofreaders often refer to the indirect consequences of their mark-up as knock-on effects. A useful way of thinking about this is in terms of dominoes because it provides us with the perfect description of what’s at stake.
Imagine you've lined up four dominos: A, B, C, and D. You push over A and it pushes over B. B then knocks over C, which in turn causes D to fall. Domino D’s topple was caused indirectly by Domino A, even though A didn’t touch D. This process can occur on page proofs and can have serious consequences. The changes we make can, if we’re not careful, impact on the text flow, the pagination, the contents list, and the index. An example of knock-on effects
Here’s an example to illustrate the point. Imagine the publisher’s brief tasks the proofreader with attending to orphans and widows (those stranded single lines at the bottom or top of a page).
Solutions that involve instructing a typesetter to shuffle a line backward to a previous page, or forward to the next page, in order to avoid the widow/orphan might cause one, or all, of the following problems:
In all three cases, the proofreader has prevented one problem but caused others. Consequently, good practice involves more than blindly placing mark-up instruction on any given page. Thought needs to be given to how the problem can be tackled and the impact managed so that there is no knock-on effect. Spotting an orphaned or widowed line is not enough. We might also have to consider the following:
Summing up
If you’re considering training as a proofreader and want to be fit for the purpose of marking up page proofs, check that your course includes a component about knock-on effects.
Even when we are supplied with detailed briefs about an ideal layout, the publisher client expects us to be mindful of the consequences of our amendments. The proofreader’s job is to find solutions to problems in ways that don’t cause unintended damage. About Louise Harnby
Louise Harnby is a line editor, copyeditor and proofreader who specializes in working with crime, mystery, suspense and thriller writers.
She is an Advanced Professional Member of the Chartered Institute of Editing and Proofreading (CIEP) and co-hosts The Editing Podcast.
3 Comments
If you're tasked with proofreading designed page proofs, annotating for change is not always the best course of action. We're into the realm of when to mark up, when to query and when to leave things be.
A tricky nut to crack
A Facebook discussion about the role of the proofreader working on copyedited proofs got me thinking about the issue of leaving well enough alone.
This was something that was addressed by my proofreading training course (via The Publishing Training Centre), and it’s a tricky nut to crack, one that on occasion still stumps me, even though I have years of practice under my belt. To clarify, this article is framed within the context of the proofreader who is working with page proofs, because this is the case where the artistry of sensitive and sensible proofreading practice really comes into play. What are page proofs?
The mainstream publisher will usually require the proofreader to work on page proofs.
Page proofs are so called because they are laid out as exactly as they will appear in the final printed book. If all has gone well, what the proofreader is looking at will be almost what the reader sees if they were to walk into a bookshop, pull this title off the shelf and browse through the pages. The layout process has been taken care of by a professional typesetter who designs the text in a way that is pleasing to the eye and in accordance with a publisher’s brief. Why is proofreading an art?
Proofreading entails finding solutions to any final problems that have escaped the author’s, copyeditor’s, and typesetter’s attention. These professionals are only human, and it’s unusual not to find at least a few problems in a set of page proofs, despite the fact that the manuscript has been reviewed multiple times. In fact, precisely because there are so many rounds of review, the opportunity for errors to be introduced is higher.
The artistry comes in because it’s not enough to be able to spot those final pesky typos, misplaced apostrophes, incorrect running heads, missing captions, poorly aligned table figures, and so on. The good proofreader needs to know when to leave well enough alone. The Chartered Institute of Editing and Proofreading (CIEP) says: “… Part of the job is light editing within tight limits, but professional proofreaders do not re-edit the material. They intervene only with good reason [my emphasis]” (CIEP, n.d. FAQs: Proofreading). Here’s a brief summary of why proofreaders need to take care with the extent of their mark-up:
Intervention can be expensive
Some publisher clients will ask for “minimal” mark-up for reasons of cost. Depending on what arrangements they have with typesetter, amending page proofs can be an expensive business for a publisher. For example, one of my clients is charged per line for any amendments to page proofs; others are charged per amendment; and still others negotiate a fixed price for the job. Thus, in the case of the per-line deal, one change in each of five separate lines will be five times as expensive as five changes in the same line. It’s not necessarily the proofreader’s call Copyeditors will have worked extensively with the author on the pre-proof manuscript. Certain decisions will have been made, such as how deep to edit, grammatical preferences, and overall style. Even if the proofreader doesn’t agree with the preferences, she needs to mind our own business and get on with the job in hand within the framework of these agreed decisions. If these preferences jar with the brief supplied to the proofreader, she should query the issue with the project manager or the copyeditor rather than making assumptions. Of course, as an editor colleague commented when reviewing this post, this is a clarion call for the proofreader to be supplied with a detailed style sheet, and I’ll be taking a look at this issue in more detail in the near future. There could be serious knock-on effects Here’s the CIEP again with some wise advice: “Judge the need for changes in view of the budget and schedule. Changing just one word can have drastic knock-on effects” (CIEP, n.d. FAQs: Proofreading). For a more detailed discussion of the issue, take a look at Proofreading designed page proofs: knock-on effects. There isn't always a simple solution At some stage or other, and even when working with the finest of editors, every proofreader will be faced with an inelegant piece of writing. Perhaps the subject–verb agreement is a little confusing in a complex sentence; perhaps the sentence is structured such that its meaning is cloudy; perhaps the author’s meaning is clear even though one could argue that the way it’s been expressed is grammatically “sticky”. Given that we’re not supposed to re-edit, that decisions have already been made by the copyeditor and author, and that there could be expensive knock-on effects as a result of our changes, we’re looking for simple but elegant solutions. However, it may be the case that a simple, elegant solution to the problem is impossible to achieve by, for example, simply adding/removing a letter or changing the punctuation slightly. Indeed, the proofreader might think their simple amendments have made things better, but if their solution is equally (or even more) uncomfortable for the reader, or the author’s meaning has been clouded for the sake of pedantry, then they've done more harm than good. A cautionary tale and a lesson learned
Have I ever over-marked? Have I intervened when I should have left well enough alone? Alas, yes. And I wasn't an inexperienced proofreader when it happened. I’ve elected to share my tale of shame in the hope that any over-enthusiastic proofreaders reading this will be able to learn from the mistake I made!
Some years ago, I proofread an academic book for a regular publisher client. The book had been copyedited by an editor with whom I’d worked on several occasions. She always does a super job. And, really, that should have been the only alarm bell I needed. The page proofs arrived and I noticed that the book was littered with whiches – rather than thats – being used for restrictive relative clauses. I changed them all. In pen. After all, I reasoned, even though in British English this usage is acceptable (though not always preferred), my publisher client is a stickler and the book’s market is international. Satisfied that I’d done a very fine job indeed I posted back the proofs to the copyeditor, who went on to collate my changes with the author’s. A week later I received a very polite email from a frustrated copyeditor. She informed me that though she, too, would have preferred to change every appropriate “which” to “that,” the author was particularly sensitive to having his copy amended and she’d had to settle for a lighter edit. She’d notified the in-house project manager and the decision had been agreed. “In future, if any extensive changes need to be made, would you be kind enough to check first? I'm going to have to stet a lot of your mark-up.” On an embarrassment scale of one to ten, I rated at least fifteen. My face was redder than my proofreading pen. I’d wasted my time and I’d wasted hers. And if I’d simply checked with her (or the in-house project manager) before I’d let my pen run wild, the problem could have been avoided. I still work for that publisher and I still proofread books for that copyeditor. But I learned my lesson. A note: A colleague who reviewed this article argued persuasively that the embarrassment shouldn't have been mine alone – in this situation I wasn't given a comprehensive style sheet detailing the decisions made. Either the copyeditor or the publisher could have supplied one – certainly many professional editors consider this to be not only good business practice but proper business practice. At the very least, someone could have emailed me with a brief heads-up. Nevertheless, since the proofreader cannot guarantee that they’ll receive such a style sheet, and busy editors and publishers are only human and sometimes forget things, my point about querying stands. It’s always, always better to clarify than to assume. Amend, query or move on?
Editing is an art. But proofreading is, too. Sometimes we need to stop and think before we amend; sometimes we need to put down the pen and either query or move on. Knowing when to leave well enough alone can be a tricky call to make.
We’re not here to re-edit. What we do sits in the context of a chain of decisions that have already been made by other professionals – decisions about budget, schedule, style, brief and design. Failing to acknowledge this fact can lead to time wastage at best, and harm at worst. About Louise Harnby
Louise Harnby is a line editor, copyeditor and proofreader who specializes in working with crime, mystery, suspense and thriller writers.
She is an Advanced Professional Member of the Chartered Institute of Editing and Proofreading (CIEP) and co-hosts The Editing Podcast.
If you’re thinking about becoming a professional proofreader, it’s important to understand that the term 'proofreading' can mean different things in different contexts and with different client groups. This article focuses on working with designed page proofs,
Who are your clients?
What type of proofreading you want to do and which groups of clients you want to be work-ready for will determine the choices you make with regard to training.
Some proofreaders work directly with the creators of the written materials being proofread – independent authors, students and business professionals, for example. These clients send Word files and the proofreader amends the files directly (often with Track Changes switched on so that the client can see what’s been changed). Others work for intermediaries such as publishers and project management agencies. Here the author supplies the text files; then the in-house project manager (PM) organizes the various elements of the production process – including copy-editing, proofreading, typesetting and printing. After copy-editing and typesetting, the PM supplies page proofs to the proofreader, who makes annotations that identify where there are problems to be attended to. The proofreader does not amend the text directly. Here in Part I, I give the new entrant to the field an overview of what it’s like to be a proofreader working with page proofs. In Part II, I’ll consider proofreading work that involves working directly with the raw Word files. What are page proofs?
Page proofs, traditionally defined, are so called because they are laid out exactly as they will appear in the final printed book. If all has gone well, what the proofreader is looking at will be almost what the reader sees if they were to walk into a bookshop, pull this title off the shelf and browse through the pages.
The layout process has been taken care of by a professional typesetter or interior formatter who designs the text in a way that is pleasing to the eye and in accordance with a publisher’s brief. Page proofs from publishers and project management agencies are usually either in paper or PDF format. When working on paper, you'll likely still be supplied with a PDF (which comes in useful when using digital tools). In addition to the bulk of the typeset text, page proofs include the following elements: page numbers; running heads; a contents list; copyright information; cataloguing data; figures, tables and any other finished artwork; bibliography; and perhaps an index. The jacket may or may not be included, but there’ll usually be a title page and a half-title page. To reiterate, the pages have been professionally designed, so your job is not only to check for any final grammar, spelling or punctuation errors that have slipped in during the production chain; you're also tasked with ensuring that the appearance of the book is consistent and correct according to the instructions given to the typesetter by the client. Thus, you'll need to carry out a range of checks to ensure the following:
This isn't a comprehensive list but it gives you an idea of how this type of proofreading goes beyond just checking the text for typos. Download this free proofreading checklist if your client doesn't supply you with one. 
Where are you in the chain?
The proofreader is one person in a fairly lengthy chain. Different clients work in different ways but the following is not uncommon:
The process is often further complicated by the ebook creation process. Text might be digitized at different stages of the process. What does this mean for your working methods?
You're not actually changing anything … You can use digital tools to complement your eye – various scripted macros, consistency checkers like PerfectIt, and reference-checking software like ReferenceChecker.
To use these tools you need to strip text from a PDF of the page proofs, place it in a Word document, and then run your digital tools. Any mistakes flagged up, however, need to be marked up on the page proofs – that is, on paper or PDF (as agreed with the PM). You don’t get to change the actual text – you only get to make marks on it (usually those little hieroglyphics that constitute, in the UK, the BS 5261C:2005 proof-correction symbols). But you're checking everything … Recall, too, that you're paid to check every word and every page. Relevant software is a brilliant addition to any proofreader’s tool kit, but it will only go so far because the proofreader’s job goes beyond error-checking. We’re looking for layout problems, too, because we’re working on designed text – the first draft of the final page proofs. There are legal issues … you can only use software tools that are already sitting on your PC. This is because of confidentiality issues. All my publisher PMs consider it unacceptable business practice for me to send the page proofs (or the text stripped from them) to a third party, as the following direct quotes demonstrate:
What does this mean for training?
If you want to proofread for publishers, it’s likely that you’ll be working on page proofs. This means you’ll need to learn to use the industry-recognized mark-up language effectively and efficiently, and you’ll need to be able to carry out the necessary design and layout checks.
If your training course doesn't teach you how to mark up using the relevant symbols or what to look out for in terms of layout problems, it’s probably not the right course to make you fit for publisher work. Furthermore, you’ll have to learn not to interfere beyond your brief. Not all publishers want every single inconsistency attended to. Amendments made at page-proof stage are expensive to implement so many publishers ask for 'minimal' correction. How they define 'minimal' will vary so you’ll need to work according to a clear brief. And if you’re not given a clear brief, you’ll need to ask for one. Assumptions about your remit are to be avoided – what one PM considers unworthy of change will be considered an essential error by another! The business of knowing when to leave well enough alone and when to interfere is one of the trickiest issues to deal with, so doing a course that has an assessment element is a good idea if you are working with page proofs and publisher clients. Summing up …
Proofreading isn't some catch-all phrase that means the same thing to every client group. What you actually do, on which medium, how much you interfere, the extent to which you can use complementary tools, and the expectations of the client will differ greatly.
This means a range of competencies will need to be acquired depending on whom you’re working for. Your training will need to match the requirements of various client groups – a publisher’s expectations in terms of industry-recognized standards will be different from a business executive’s or student’s, so take care to research any proofreading training syllabus carefully to make sure it’s providing you with the skill set relevant to your target client group. Your training should suit your needs, your business plan, your objectives; and what will be right for one person may not be right for another. In Part II ...
In Part II, I look at proofreading for clients who want you to work directly on the text in Word; how the line between editing and proofreading can become blurred; and how this might influence the type of training you do or the work you choose to take on.
About Louise Harnby
Louise Harnby is a line editor, copyeditor and proofreader who specializes in working with crime, mystery, suspense and thriller writers.
She is an Advanced Professional Member of the Chartered Institute of Editing and Proofreading (CIEP) and co-hosts The Editing Podcast.
If you don't have the full paid-for versions of, say, Adobe Acrobat or PDF-XChange, you can still use my proofreading stamps.  A colleague explains ...My colleague Sara Peacock demonstrated the stamps. She said: The stamps work with [the free] Adobe Reader, but the proofreader will need to ensure that whoever creates the PDF enables comments before sending it, otherwise the comment tools that are needed (as well as the stamps, the pencil tool, the strikeout tool, and so on) won't be accessible. For years, I've used PDF XChange, though I now have the paid-for version. The stamps palette is much clearer, for one thing, and uploading the stamps is quicker, too. I'd recommend giving Viewer a try, even if you're a die-hard Acrobat user! Even better, XChange Viewer allows you to upload them all in one go. Note: Always check with your client first to make sure the PDF reader you're using is compatible with their workflows. How to get the digital PDF markup stamps
 A sample of just a few of my proofreading stamps. Tips for using stampsTips
 PDF-XChange Viewer: screenshot of stamps palette and minimizing tool. About Louise Harnby Louise Harnby is a line editor, copyeditor and proofreader who specializes in working with crime, mystery, suspense and thriller writers. She is an Advanced Professional Member of the Chartered Institute of Editing and Proofreading (CIEP) and co-hosts The Editing Podcast.
This article contains installation instructions for most versions of Acrobat and PDF-XChange. Scroll down the page to find the set appropriate for the platform you're working with.
No advanced tech knowledge required!
Rest assured that you don't need advanced technical knowledge to install the stamps. In fact, you don't need any technical knowledge at all! You simply need to be able to follow the instructions as they are given.
Use the right instructions!
I've updated this post several times since it was first written in 2012 as new versions of software have been released.
Please follow my instructions to the letter. I've provided installation support to a number of users in recent years. On every occasion, problems occurred for one of the following reasons:
Again, please ensure that you follow the instructions step by step before you contact me to report that you're having problems. If you do need to contact me, please tell me the following:
Download the stamps
The first step is to DOWNLOAD THE STAMPS, whichever set of instructions your are using.
PDF-XChange Editor 8.0
Instructions correct as of 4 January 2020 and apply to Windows 10, Office 365
PDF-XChange Editor 6.0
My colleague Helen Mortimor has kindly provided the following installation instructions for use with Editor 6.0:
PDF-XChange Editor 3.0
My colleague Steve Hammatt has kindly provided the following installation instructions for use with Editor 3.0:
PDF-XChange Pro and the free Viewer 2.0
One of the main benefits of using PDF-XChange Viewer is that you can import all my stamps in one go. Video tutorial. For those of you who'd like to watch a tutorial of the steps outlined below, here's a video demonstration in which I talk you through the process, step by step, while actually downloading a set of stamps onto my own computer.
NB: This is the squeaky-chair edit, a limited-edition version created especially to provide the feel-good factor for editorial freelancers whose home offices benefit from well-oiled swivel-seating arrangements! Written instructions
* Can't find the AppData folder? If you can't find the folder, the most likely reason is that the Application Data (or AppData) folder (a hidden folder) is invisible on your computer.
Acrobat 9 (Standard and the free Reader)
The first time you do this you’ll have to write in a category (e.g. Red Stamps). When you import a second stamp you can simply select this option. You can also name the stamp if you wish but I didn’t bother, choosing instead to leave the default New Stamp. When you have uploaded all your stamps and are ready to start marking up your document, select Show Stamps Palette from the stamp icon in the ribbon menu and a box will appear. If you have different categories (e.g. Blue Stamps) you can select these from here. Acrobat <9 (Standard and the free Reader)
The first time you do this you’ll have to type in a category (e.g. Red Stamps). When you import a second stamp you can simply select this option. You can also name the stamp. When you have downloaded all your stamps and are ready to start marking up your document, select the drop-down menu from the stamp icon in the ribbon menu, and the categories you have created will be listed along with the defaults. You can then select the stamp from the category you require. Acrobat X
My colleague Jenny Macgregor has very kindly put together some instructions for downloading my proofreading stamps into Acrobat X. Here's her advice...
Adobe Acrobat Reader DC
Instructions correct as of 5 December 2021
Tips
Here are a few tips to bear in mind when using stamps. Search the Stamps archive for other useful articles and resources.
PDF-XChange Viewer: screenshot of minimizing tool and stamps palette.
About Louise Harnby
Louise Harnby is a line editor, copyeditor and proofreader who specializes in working with crime, mystery, suspense and thriller writers.
She is an Advanced Professional Member of the Chartered Institute of Editing and Proofreading (CIEP) and co-hosts The Editing Podcast.
Discover tips for marking up PDF page proofs using digital BS 5261-2 (2005) symbols.
Options for PDF markup
These days, it's commonplace to be asked to edit and proofread onscreen. If you're editing in Word, all well and good; you can amend the text directly. If you're tackling designed page proofs, you'll probably be working on a PDF. Stamps can help.
The PDF editor's onboard markup tool is one option. Using custom stamps is another, and that's what I'll be exploring in this article. Why use custom stamps?
Even in the standard versions of most PDF editors (as opposed to their freely available readers), the tools can be restrictive.
Punctuation errors can be a major problem – the insertion and deletion tools for punctuation marks (and even single letters) are often ambiguous, with the highlight or strike-out line appearing to ‘spread’ further on the page than would be the case on a traditional paper mark-up. About the digital markup stamps …
I created a set of custom stamps that can be imported into my PDF editing software (I have both PDF-XChange and Acrobat).
The stamps are based on the current BSI proofreading symbols and once downloaded can be imprinted onto the page, giving the proof the appearance of its paper cousin. No more clunky comments and digital sticky notes, and say goodbye to ambiguous highlighting. Now you can keep the comment boxes in reserve for queries to your author or in-house editor. The following is a sample of just a few of my stamps. 
Which software is compatible?
I’ve tested the stamps on Adobe Acrobat (standard version) and PDF-XChange and can confirm that they can be imported (other PDF editors that have stamping functions, such as Foxit and PDFill, may also be compatible.
However, always check with your client to make sure that the PDF reader you're using is compatible with their workflow. What if you only have a free reader/viewer?
You don't need to have the full paid-for versions of Acrobat or XChange in order to use the stamps.
You can use your free Acrobat Reader as long as you ask the person who has created the PDF to 'enable comments'. With PDF XChange Viewer, you don't even need to worry about enabling comments – the stamps will work on your PDF as soon as you have uploaded them. An additional benefit of Viewer is that you can import all the stamps in one go. Can you use the stamps with a Mac?
The stamps files are PDFs so it doesn't make any difference whether you're working on a PC or a Mac.
Rather, the most important thing is that you have the Mac version of your PDF editor, e.g. Acrobat for Mac. What does the marked-up proof look like?
I’ve been delighted with the results, as have many of my clients. The marked-up proofs using the stamps are much clearer to read, as the two examples show.
There are only four amendments in Example 1, the comment-box version. Imagine how much time it would have taken to select the text, choose the relevant option from the Text Edits menu and write the instruction to the typesetter if all the amendments in Example 2 had been made without using stamps. And if the typesetter opened up all these comments boxes, what a mess it would have been. 
Example 1: Using the comment box only.
Example 2: Using customized stamps.
Creating stamps
Creating the stamps is the fiddly part and the most time-consuming.
Getting the correct size, so that you don’t have to resize each stamp when you’re working on a set of proofs, takes a little time and, of course, creating each individual stamp can seem painstaking. However, the job only has to be done once and I’ve been using mine for a couple of years now. It’s worth spending some time playing around with your designs early on in order to make life easier for yourself later. I’ve created stamps in red, blue and black because my clients have different requirements. I used Publisher to create the stamps, but you could use any software with a drawing tool. Set up each stamp on a separate page. Once you’ve drawn all your stamps convert the file into a PDF. Want to use the stamps I've already created?
I’m happy to share with colleagues who have the same commitment as I do to improving skills and supporting our industry’s professional standards.
To access your copies of my stamps, click here – there's no charge. If you're using PDF-XChange (I'd recommend you do so), make sure you select the stamps labelled "XChange". Note: Please note that my stamps are based on proofreading symbols as defined by BS 5261-2 (2005). If you are working outside the UK, not all of the symbols may conform to those you are used to working with. Importing customized stamps
About Louise Harnby
Louise Harnby is a line editor, copyeditor and proofreader who specializes in working with crime, mystery, suspense and thriller writers.
She is an Advanced Professional Member of the Chartered Institute of Editing and Proofreading (CIEP) and co-hosts The Editing Podcast.
|
BLOG ALERTS
Sign up for blog alerts!
NEWSLETTER
Sign up for The Editorial Letter.
EDITOR RESOURCES
BOOKS FOR EDITORS AND WRITERS
TRAINING COURSES FOR EDITORS
TESTIMONIALS
'I love the clean impact you've brought to my writing'
Thomas R Weaver 'The voyage through your edits is an intellectual and craft adventure' Dan Flanigan 'I'm a better writer because you edited my book' Rich Leder 'You are by far the best literary editor I've had' Nina Fitzpatrick 'I wholeheartedly recommend her services ... Just don’t hire her when I need her' Jeff Carson 'Sincere thanks for a beautiful and elegant piece of work. First class' JB Turner CATEGORIES
All
ARCHIVES
June 2026
|
RSS Feed
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
© 2011–2026 Louise Harnby