Louise Harnby | Fiction Editor & Proofreader
  • Home
  • Resource library
  • Services
  • Courses
  • Books
  • Podcast
  • Blog
  • Training login
  • Contact
The Editing Blog: for Editors, Proofreaders and Writers

FOR EDITORS, PROOFREADERS AND WRITERS

Digital proofreading using Futureproofs

18/11/2015

 
I'm an editor who loves to try new tools and interfaces – indeed, anything I can get my hands on – to increase productivity and reduce inefficiency while maintaining or improving quality.

So I was delighted when one of my regular publisher clients commissioned me to proofread a 320-page business book using Futureproofs and, upon completion of the project, report on my experience.

Futureproofs is an online markup interface for proofreaders, authors and publishers (launched in 2014). The client uploads a PDF file to the Futureproofs site and the proofreader (or author) can then access the file via their web browser and begin the proofreading process, using Futureproofs’ very own onboard markup tools. Futureproofs also lets you deal with queries, collate master proofs and proofread two versions against one another, to try to provide the full set of tools that editors and proofreaders need.

I duly carried out the proofreading work and submitted the report, a copy of which was sent to Futureproofs CEO John Pettigrew. He kindly provided some really useful follow-up comments in relation to my observations.

John and I then discussed how we might present my findings and his responses on The Proofreader’s Parlour so that other proofreaders who haven’t yet used Futureproofs might have a better idea of what to expect if one of their clients asks them to undertake proofreading work via the platform.

The outcome of that discussion is this article. John’s feedback on my initial report is included throughout. I'm extremely grateful for his permission to use his comments because from them you can learn about tweaks to the platform that are already in the pipeline or that are under consideration by the FP team.

My previous onscreen proofreading experience
My experience of onscreen proofreading is extensive – to date, over 200 books for a range of academic and professional presses. While I usually edit directly in Word when proofreading for self-publishers and businesses, onscreen proofreading for publishers is of the traditional kind – that is, I'm working on the PDFs of designed page proofs (see “Not all proofreading is the same: Part I – Working with page proofs”, Proofreader’s Parlour, 2014).

When the use of BSI* markup symbols is required, I use digital BSI stamps (see “PDF Editing – Making the Most of the Stamps Tool”, Proofreader’s Parlour, 2012) in conjunction with the PDF editor’s onboard commenting and markup tools. When BSI markup is not required or understood by the client, I use just the onboard commenting and markup tools.

The programs I’ve used for onscreen proofreading are Acrobat Reader (various versions including DC); Acrobat Pro (version 9); and PDF XChange (my preferred tool because it is an excellent and considerably cheaper alternative to Acrobat).

General objectives when proofreading onscreen
Marking up a PDF for me is all about introducing efficiencies and raising productivity without compromising on quality.

I've found proofreading on paper for publishers to be increasingly less profitable (in some cases to the extent that I've had to say goodbye to long-standing clients whom I’d really enjoyed working with).

The hourly rates offered by many academic and trade presses have not risen for some years so I need to be able to use tools that enable me to do the job just as well but faster. The option of using digital interfaces that allow me to introduce efficiencies is therefore crucial.

Proofreading for publishers is about more than checking spelling, punctuation and grammar. Because I'm working on typeset page proofs, it’s about attending to layout issues, too, and imposing consistency (including with regard to house style). It’s therefore imperative that I can view the pages, bookmark them, navigate through them, and search them quickly.

I do recognize that many of us work in similar ways, and just as many work in different ways. The manner in which I go about working efficiently may differ from that chosen by my colleagues. This review of Futureproofs is thus based on my experiences; other proofreaders may have a different story to share.

What worked well in Futureproofs (FP)
In-text markup
FP’s standout feature is undoubtedly its markup functionality. The onboard tools are quick to learn and intuitive to use – I’d cracked the markup in minutes.
  • Gone are the commenting/markup tiles and stamp palettes that we work with in PDF. Wave goodbye to downloading and formatting stamps files (from the likes of me!). All the tools you need are right there at your mouse-holding fingertips. Markup simply involves point and click, circle or underline. After that, it’s a case of choosing the instruction from the automatic popup menu.
  • I'm experienced in using commenting and markup tools so, prior to starting work in FP, I wasn't convinced that there would be any efficiency gains. However, FP handles the margin markup for the proofreader – all we have to do is worry about the in-text correction – and that’s a time-saver (and a wrist-saver!).
  • Is it faster than using a stamping tool? I'm not sure – it certainly wasn't slower (but I'm a speedy stamper!). It is, however, far more elegant in terms of usage. Overall, I’d grade this function as excellent. 
John Pettigrew pointed out that the FP markup tool supports formatted text, which Adobe Reader doesn't. ​

​Flexibility

The markup is moveable (also true when using stamps in PDF). This meant that I could be more precise when I wanted to ensure that, for example, the insert carat was close up to a word that I was adding a letter or punctuation mark to, and was in the middle of the space when I was adding a separate word.

Automatic saving
This is a lovely touch, even for an onscreen editor who’s a rampant saver (like this proofreader!). It provided me with a sense of security. Onscreen editorial professionals are usually caught out because of something like a screen crash or a whole-system shutdown. Such events are rare occurrences but if one hasn’t saved PDF proofreading work for even a few minutes it can be extremely time-consuming to locate which marks have remained intact and which have to be rekeyed. FP has removed the problem by automatically saving the marked-up file.

Querying
The query function was comfortable to use, though I’d have liked to be able to remove deleted in-text queries from the dashboard so as to prevent confusion.

Getting help
The dashboard also includes a messaging function. I didn't use this but if I'd needed technical assistance I could have alerted the FP team quickly and easily.

​Lesser frustrations when working in FP
Text selection
Though I could mark up text, I couldn’t copy or paste it. This was frustrating. If, for example, I wanted to check an author’s name, book title, or url online, I had to type the text into my web browser. More broadly, I had to use a separate PDF to strip the text into a Word document (from which I could do spelling and consistency checks, or run macros like ReferenceChecker and PerfectIt).
Says John, "It's fundamental to the way we've built Futureproofs that the page acts like a piece of paper on which you draw, which unfortunately means that the ability to copy and paste text out of the book is hard to add. That said, it's something we're well aware of and we have plans for the future. We’re also keen to add new features like automatically building a word list for consistency checks."
Formatting checks
There are a couple of issues worth mentioning:
  • There’s currently no option for a double-page spread so one can’t check that facing versos and rectos are balanced. This also slows down running-head checks – if working directly on a PDF, I’d quickly click through a double-page spread and look only at the versos. Then I’d do the same again for the rectos in order to check they matched the chapter title.
  • There is no bookmarking function. This means I couldn’t navigate with speed between elements that I have liked to tag (e.g. chapters, tables, figures and boxes). When working in Acrobat or XChange, I bookmark all the primary elements so that I can, for example, quickly locate and check chapter-drop consistency or ensure that the main chapters or sections match their page numbers in the contents list.
Good news, however. John reports that "the double-page-spread view is coming soon". Furthermore, "Bookmarking is a great idea and I'll add it to our roadmap. We follow an agile development process, which basically means that we prioritise features that lots of users ask for."

So if you’re a current FP user and you want bookmarking, tell John and help to move this function up to the top of the FP to-do list.

​Page-load times

Loading FP pages is marginally slower than when working directly on a PDF. Those tiny margins do all contribute to the issue of efficiency, though this wasn't a deal-breaker for me.

​Time tracking
I found this tool alarming and rather invasive. FP had me logged as having spent 14.2 hours on my proofs. The work actually took me 24.5 hours. It concerns me that publisher clients might use this information to make assumptions about how long a proofreader takes to work on a project and, consequently, reduce fees. In reality, proofreaders do a lot of work that doesn't involve actually physically clicking on and amending page proofs.
I was reassured by John’s response to this: “Our time tracking is deliberately very conservative, and I always point out to publishers that it will not match the billable hours for a proofreader. It counts only time spent actively marking up a proof within Futureproofs, so all those external tasks on the PDF file aren't counted, and nor are research, reference, fact-checking and all the other tasks that a good proofreader will undertake.” 

​I’d recommend that you reiterate this point to your publisher when you’ve completed a project – highlight the number of hours you actually spent on the job compared with time recorded on the FP dashboard.

Major challenges when working in FP
Stability
The stability of my internet connection was a major problem on some occasions. My connection dropped 26 times during the proofread. The dropouts lasted for between 10 seconds and 1 minute. During that time, I was unable to make any corrections. This contrasts with marking up a standalone PDF, which isn’t at the mercy of my broadband provider.

​This impacted on my productivity and was extremely frustrating. It’s not FP’s fault, and there’s nothing to be done about it at John’s end, but you should be ready to manage this issue if broadband dropouts are a known issue in your area.
John acknowledged that some users will want to be able to work offline, on a train journey for example. “We definitely plan to support this – again, it will depend on how keenly our users feel the need for it.”

​Searching

For me, the search function in FP is the biggest disappointment. The efficiency gains and elegance of FP’s markup functionality are countered by the frustrations I met when trying to locate problems in the text via the search tool.

​At the nub of the issue is the fact that clicking on an entry in the search-results window doesn’t take the proofreader to the exact spot in the text. The contextual text provided as a guide is unusable in books with large word counts and dense academic or business-related material. I was totally reliant on my PDF to identify searched-for problems, and their exact position in the file. I then had to go back to FP and use its onboard search tool, locate the matching page, find the problem, and mark it up. What could have taken a few seconds turned into a couple of minutes for every searched-for change I made.

Following are a few examples of the impact of this on a proofreader’s efficiency. I’ve provided this detail because I want to show how critical the search function is for proofreaders carrying out multiple tasks and using digital tools to provide quality and efficiency:
  • I had to be very exact with my FP searches, whereas a standard PDF allows me to search quickly and easily for fragments of words, and then use the search-results box to move directly to the exact place on the page that needs amending.
  • Locating and marking multiple instances of the same problem quickly and efficiently was impossible. For example, the author in my book had primarily used "while" and "among". I wanted to locate 30 instances of "whilst" and "amongst" quickly so that I could impose consistency. I had to search twice – first using the PDF for exact location purposes, and then using FP to mark up.
  • Efficiently checking consistency of layout of different elements of text (e.g. tables, figures, boxes, and source captions) had to be done on the PDF.
  • My efficiency was impaired when I was searching for single-issue problems. One of the tasks I carry out during every proofreading project is the creation of a word list (by stripping the text from a PDF and pasting it into a Word document). I then alphabetize it and look at each word, and those surrounding it, on the list. The whole process may sound time-consuming (and it can take several hours in a large project); however, there are two benefits: improved quality and increased efficiency. The word list will flag up many things that I need to check – sometimes hundreds. Some will turn out not to need amending, while some will need marking up (for example, Harnby, Harnvy).

    In a 150,000 word text, I’m not convinced any proofreader can rely on their brain to spot (and check) any such potential errors as they’re working through the book page by page, line by line, word by word. That’s why I locate these problems before I start the actual read-through – I’m getting this part of the job out of the way so that I can concentrate on the spelling, punctuation, grammar and context during the read-through. I need to be able to locate the issues quickly and then mark up accordingly.

    ​When working directly in PDF, it’s a one-stop process because the search tool takes me directly to the place on the page. In FP, I had to find each problem using the other PDF, and then find the corresponding problem in FP. I tried using the contextual text to help me do this directly but when searching for one word in FP I sometimes ended up scanning half a page. The process was simply too slow.
John’s response to the word-list issue was pleasing: “Word lists are similarly a great idea (one lots of proofreaders use) and something that we could generate automatically for you, if that was useful.”

So, if you’re an FP proofreader, and you’d like this function incorporated, let John know!

In regard to the search issue, John had this to say: “We know that our search tool has a way to go before it's finished – we only added it in August! Currently, we match your search term against whole words, but we’re adding a partial-match feature soon; we do already have a 'relevancy' search option that deals cleverly with multi-word searches (allowing results to be returned even if words are in the wrong order), and we will be expanding the available options in the future.
​

“We're well aware of the limitations with highlighting words on the page and hope to address them in the future … it is a significant challenge – by no means insurmountable but something that would take a little longer to achieve.” 

​Page rotation

​I couldn’t rotate landscaped material and so had to proofread such pages using the PDF and then return to the FP file in order to mark up (twisting my head and neck somewhat in the process!). Given that many of the books I work on for academic and professional houses include landscaped figures, tables and appendices, a separate PDF was absolutely essential.
John responded positively, stating that page rotation is another feature that his team could add fairly easily. Again, if you’re a proofreader who wants to see this function in FP, let John know so that he can prioritize it. 

Summary

  • If you’re a proofreader who’s asked to work within the Futureproofs interface, don’t panic! The dashboard is simple to navigate and the proofreading platform takes only minutes to get to grips with.
  • The line-by-line markup functionality is, frankly, gorgeous. If my work involved simply word-by-word markup, FP would score top marks.
  • However, professional proofreading requires so much more than this. Ultimately, I was still reliant on two discrete mediums – FP and a PDF. The result of this is that I couldn't work efficiently because not all the functionality was in one place.
  • If there are functions you want FP to include, make sure you tell John's team so that they can prioritize accordingly. They can’t act on what they don’t know!
  • I think that FP has promise, and that if the interface can be refined to improve search functionality (so that it competes with, or even exceeds, that of Acrobat and XChange), navigation, bookmarking and page layout, it could be a product of choice for proofreaders. At the present, though, it elicits a mixture of elation and frustration.
  • Would I like to use it again? I’m prepared to work with my clients in ways that best suit their needs. Thus, if a client asked me to work in FP (rather than on PDF), I’d first need to build the reduction in efficiencies (as a result of the search issues) into my accounting in order to decide whether to accept the job. I’d also need to insist on the supply of a separate PDF. With those issues in order, I’d say yes.
* BSI = British Standards Institution, which has issued BS 5261C:2005 "Marks for copy preparation and proof correction".


UPDATE APRIL 2016: Since I wrote this review, several exciting new features and improvements have been integrated into the Futureproofs platform. See 'Taking another look at Futureproofs (by John Pettigrew)'.

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), a member of ACES, a Partner Member of The Alliance of Independent Authors (ALLi), and co-hosts The Editing Podcast.

Visit her business website at Louise Harnby | Fiction Editor & Proofreader, say hello on Twitter at @LouiseHarnby, connect via Facebook and LinkedIn, and check out her books and courses.

Richard Adin link
19/11/2015 08:43:20 am

Very interesting article. Although I do not do proofreading any more, some of the issues you raise about FP are concerning even to editors, namely the cloud computing and time tracking. Although Pettigrew's response regarding time tracking is all well and good, it is a "feature" that should be dropped because it is an invitation to trouble between publisher and proofreader. There will be clients who will look at the discrepancy, pay your bill, and not call again because they believe you are cheating them. It is always very difficult to move clients from hard numbers.

The cloud is another problem. Clients are yet accepting excuses that the cloud ate my homework and until they do, I want local control. It is not just a matter of stability; what do you do when FP's servers are down for 3 days because they were hacked?

Anne Waddingham
19/11/2015 10:12:48 am

People have been asking me about FP so am grateful for this useful review, Louise. It would be interesting to revisit it after the improvements John mentions.

Anne Brennan
19/11/2015 10:01:50 pm

A fascinating and valuable review, Louise. Thank you.

What does "BSI" stand for? I googled it and found nothing useful.

Louise Harnby
20/11/2015 10:18:35 am

Hi Anne.

BSI stands for British Standards Institution, which has issued BS 5261C:2005, "Marks for copy preparation and proof correction". Hard copies can be purchased from the Society for Editors and Proofreaders at a discount.

Hope that helps!

Anne Brennan
20/11/2015 09:23:30 pm

Ah! Thanks, Louise. For some reason, googling didn't bring up any mention of proofreading marks in connection with British Standards Institution. I hadn't heard of BSI marks here in Canada.

Louise Harnby
20/11/2015 09:55:08 pm

My apologies, Anne. It was very parochial of me! I'll amend the post to spell things out for my non-UK colleagues.


Comments are closed.

    BLOG ALERTS

    If you'd like me to email you when a new blog post is available, sign up for blog alerts!
    Proofreading stamps
    ALERT ME!

    WHAT DO YOU NEED?

    • Training courses
    • ​Books and guides
    • Editor resources
    • Author resources
    • ​Monthly newsletter
    Picture
    SIGN ME UP

    PDF MARKUP

    Proofreading stamps

    AUTHOR RESOURCES

    Proofreading stamps

    EDITOR RESOURCES

    Proofreading stamps

    BOOKS FOR EDITORS AND WRITERS

    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    MORE BOOKS

    TRAINING COURSES FOR EDITORS

    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Blogging for Business Growth course
    MORE COURSES

    TESTIMONIALS


    Dare Rogers

    'Louise uses her expertise to hone a story until it's razor sharp, while still allowing the author’s voice to remain dominant.'

    Jeff Carson

    'I wholeheartedly recommend her services ... Just don’t hire her when I need her.'

    J B Turner

    'Sincere thanks for a beautiful and elegant piece of work. First class.'

    Ayshe Gemedzhy

    'What makes her stand out and shine is her ability to immerse herself in your story.'

    Salt Publishing

    'A million thanks – your mark-up is perfect, as always.'
    TESTIMONIALS

    CATEGORIES

    All
    Around The World
    Audio Books
    Author Chat
    Author Interviews
    Author Platform
    Author Resources
    Blogging
    Book Marketing
    Books
    Branding
    Business Tips
    Choosing An Editor
    Client Talk
    Conscious Language
    Core Editorial Skills
    Crime Writing
    Design And Layout
    Dialogue
    Editing
    Editorial Tips
    Editorial Tools
    Editors On The Blog
    Erotica
    Fiction
    Fiction Editing
    Freelancing
    Free Stuff
    Getting Noticed
    Getting Work
    Grammar Links
    Guest Writers
    Indexing
    Indie Authors
    Lean Writing
    Line Craft
    Link Of The Week
    Macro Chat
    Marketing Tips
    Money Talk
    Mood And Rhythm
    More Macros And Add Ins
    Networking
    Online Courses
    PDF Markup
    Podcasting
    POV
    Proofreading
    Proofreading Marks
    Publishing
    Punctuation
    Q&A With Louise
    Resources
    Roundups
    Self Editing
    Self Publishing Authors
    Sentence Editing
    Showing And Telling
    Software
    Stamps
    Starting Out
    Story Craft
    The Editing Podcast
    Training
    Types Of Editing
    Using Word
    Website Tips
    Work Choices
    Working Onscreen
    Working Smart
    Writer Resources
    Writing
    Writing Tips
    Writing Tools

    ARCHIVES

    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    March 2014
    January 2014
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    June 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011

    RSS Feed

Alliance of Independent Authors
Picture
Picture
CIEP Advanced Professional Member
The Publishing Training Centre
INFO ABOUT ME
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions
Contact form
Code of practice
Qualifications
​Portfolio ​ 
​Bio page
Louise's fiction
About Louise
INFO FOR INDIE AUTHORS
Editorial services
Contact form
Can you expect perfection?
Books and guides
Transform Your Fiction series
Free resources
​
Order form for books
Testimonials
Self-editing book

Want to sign up to my monthly newsletter, The Editorial Letter? 
INFO FOR EDITORS
Training courses​
Books and guides
​​Business Skills for Editors series
Transform Your Fiction series
Free resources
1:1 business consultations
Order books and courses
​The Editing Podcast
​The Editing Blog