Editing is one of those skillsets that many people claim to do well but which few actually do. And while it’s probably the most important service an author can solicit (second only to book cover design), it’s often undervalued. Furthermore, most authors have no idea how to assess an editor’s work, and the result can be catastrophic, ranging from an editor who introduces new errors to an editor who changes the intention of your writing.
In Frank’s situation, I would lean toward the first option of getting a written “developmental critique” or “manuscript assessment.” While a sample edit would be helpful in determining whether this person would eventually be a good choice as an editor, I believe the critique on everything written so far would, for most authors, be the most useful for making course corrections before completing the manuscript.
Are you writing a picture book? A chapter book or easy reader? Is your book for middle grade readers or young adults? You may not know for sure! What age groups will be reading your book? How many words should your book have to be age appropriate? What themes or topics are typically relevant? These are some of the more generalized questions your editor can answer for you.
I've done four covers through Ebook Launch for two different series, and they've knocked it out of the park every time. In one case they were creating brand new covers based on a high-concept mashup idea. In another, they were following in the footsteps of a different designer, who'd already established the look for an existing series. Both times -- whether coming up with something totally new or sticking to an established style -- they did fantastic work. I love my Ebook Launch covers!
I got in touch with Ebook Launch lately to sort out a cover for my second book, and I cannot recommend them enough. The process was quick and easy, and the effort put into capturing the mood of my story was apparent from the first sketch. Their service was friendly and accommodating, and they were open to making or reverting changes to my covers without any trouble. I appreciate the hard work they put in on my behalf, and wholly recommend their services.
With years of industry experience and an extensive writing backing, stemming from dual Bachelors' degrees in English and Communications, I have the skills needed to provide clients with quality and insightful work. The majority of my work centers around creating clear, clean and concise online content. I can breathe new life into your website, or develop stand-out content for your marketing efforts.
Of course, my c.v. does include traditionally published books, but in those cases, I was hired (yes, on a freelance basis, which you would not “count”) by the publisher rather than by the author. The reason my marketing to authors instead emphasizes my experience with self-published and even vanity press authors is because working with a publisher is different from working directly with an author, particularly with an author who has made a conscious choice not to be traditionally published. Some might even say that working within a publishing house provides less preparation for working with self-published authors than does working with other self-published authors. I, however, would not go so far as to say that, because I really do believe we can come to our profession by different paths, just as people can come to writing by different paths.
Stephen, you’re right, and I think much of the confusion about editing and its pricing stems from the fact that editors offer a range of services (in addition to a range of experience). It might be best to view editing on a spectrum from broad (developmental) to detailed (copyediting and proofreading). And it’s always best to have as clear an idea as you can about the kind of editing you believe you need.
There seems to be something half-way between beta-reading and development editing. I think it’s right for many new writers — I’m just finishing my first book, and was not about to pay a real development editor, but beta readers weren’t engaged enough (especially friends unwilling to point out the negatives). But it this kind of editing doesn’t really have a clear name.
The greatest benefit of an editor is that he or she is not the author. An editor is someone else. Some editors are professional writers, but every single one of them is a professional reader. As a writer, you’re probably a voracious reader, but you can never be a true reader for your book. By bringing forth a book into the world, you’re asking other people to read something you’ve never read. If you sincerely want the book to be the very best that it can be, then you must ask someone else to read it first. You owe it to your book, to yourself, and to your readers.
I would absolutely encourage authors to find someone who fits their budget, offers payment plans and will work with them to get the services they can afford (some authors might be able to get away with just a manuscript evaluation, for example) I have to agree with the previous comments. Someone who is working for two bucks an hour can’t possibly be a professional, no matter how fair their prices, and that does not bode well for your end product.
At first, I didn't want to add Fiverr to this list because there are a LOT of editors on Fiverr that aren't exactly a good investment. But, that doesn't mean there aren't amazing opportunities out there. Editors like Kerrie McLoughlin, have done an amazing job with their Editor Fiver gigs. However, if you do decide to go through Fiverr, then ABSOLUTELY use my test to ensure you aren't hiring someone who isn't qualified.
Obviously there is a big difference. I actually started with screenplays (with some mild success) partly due to hearing that as long as you have a good story, the grammatical errors won’t be a big deal. Well, that was not true. Maybe if a producer liked the story or I was already established but every contest I entered always came back with feedback about the grammatical errors. Even if I won or placed as a finalist, I always received critique on that. Very little is spelling error, it was more about structure, etc.