|
PERRY
|
|
|
|
I'm currently reading Deaver's The Broken Window (2008) as published by Hodger and Staunton (London) and printed by Clays of St Ives.
Putting me off my enjoyment is the persistent breaking of wo-
rds at the end of the page, sticking hyphens in the most uncomfortable of places.
In this day and age of PDF based print setting, I find this lazy and disrespectful of writer, publisher and reader. The printers are getting paid to do their best work and frankly I'd regard this as a rip off.
Any opinions?
|
|
sulcus
|
|
|
|
Quote: PERRY, Sunday, 9 Oct 2011 12:09I'm currently reading Deaver's The Broken Window (2008) as published by Hodger and Staunton (London) and printed by Clays of St Ives. Putting me off my enjoyment is the persistent breaking of wo- rds at the end of the page, sticking hyphens in the most uncomfortable of places. In this day and age of PDF based print setting, I find this lazy and disrespectful of writer, publisher and reader. The printers are getting paid to do their best work and frankly I'd regard this as a rip off. Any opinions? Perhaps it helps build up the suspense as you hold your breath at the end of the line, in order to see what the rest of the word is on the next line...
"A,B&E", "Not In My Name" and "52FF" (flash fiction anthology) all available on Amazon Kindle"How a psychopath makes sweet love. I can get you ringside. Royal box even."
|
|
PERRY
|
|
|
|
Very droll, sulcus. 
|
|
Oxfordia
|
|
|
|
Quote: PERRY, Sunday, 9 Oct 2011 12:09I'm currently reading Deaver's The Broken Window (2008) as published by Hodger and Staunton (London) and printed by Clays of St Ives. Putting me off my enjoyment is the persistent breaking of wo- rds at the end of the page, sticking hyphens in the most uncomfortable of places. In this day and age of PDF based print setting, I find this lazy and disrespectful of writer, publisher and reader. The printers are getting paid to do their best work and frankly I'd regard this as a rip off. Any opinions? The book hasn't been proofread, probably to save money. That happens a lot... Some printers (typesetters) include a proofreading option in their service but they don't all do it and that's not their responsability. The editing of the text lies with the publisher and that should be done in 2 different stages: the first one when they edit the text (they work on the ms), and the second one when the text is proofread at proof stage. Ideally, there are even 2 proofreads . In this particular case, the publisher is to blame for skipping this step of production, unless the contract stipulated that it wouldn't be done by them and that the proofread was the author's responsability, in which case he can do it himself (but risk missing some of the mistakes because he knows the text and probably hasn't had the technical training proofreaders go through) or employ a freelance. It's actually quite chocking that more and more publishers expect the authors to do the pre-production work (editing and providing ready-for-camera copies, proofreading, etc) and to take the lead in the marketing phase of the release. The publishers end up working less and less, diminishing their costs but still taking as big a share of royalties. Meanwhile, they get rid of their editors, copy-editors, proofreaders and freelancers which leaves more people struggling to make a living whilst the quality of books gradually gets worse and worse...
This post was last edited by Oxfordia, 09 Oct 2011, 13:29
|
|
PERRY
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your input, Oxfordia. You're right there, but proof-reading is done on the actual pre-printing drafts.
I've a long history with a local publisher and they barely glance at the script inside a book, only checking the cover and flysheets to ensure the title, copyright, credits and bibliography are in order.
A printer is expected to faithfully reproduce what has been painstakingly checked and rechecked prior to the printing stage.
All it takes is for the printer to programme the print to the equivalent of "Justified". This isn't a matter of spelling, but layout. I'm afraid the printer is wholly to blame.
|
|
sulcus
|
|
|
|
Quote: Oxfordia, Sunday, 9 Oct 2011 13:27Quote: PERRY, Sunday, 9 Oct 2011 12:09 It's actually quite chocking could have done with some proof reading here!) that more and more publishers expect the authors to do the pre-production work (editing and providing ready-for-camera copies, proofreading, etc) and to take the lead in the marketing phase of the release. The publishers end up working less and less, diminishing their costs but still taking as big a share of royalties. Meanwhile, they get rid of their editors, copy-editors, proofreaders and freelancers which leaves more people struggling to make a living whilst the quality of books gradually gets worse and worse... We can regret it all we like, but this is the reality of the book market forces. Production values are being driven down to save money. marketing costs went west a long time ago for mid-list authors. it's why more and more people take the decision to self-publish, they'd be doing the promotion work even if they managed to land a book deal, so why wait around on a wing and a prayer for a book deal when you can just get it out yourself. This is what happens when you let market forces dictate what should be an art form, although the notion of arts subsidy in this day and age is also inconceivable. But my point is that when you degrade artistic values & slavish focus on the market and commerciality, ultimately the quality of the product goes down anyway and in all likelihood, the production values involved too, because the book is no longer an artefact.
This post was last edited by sulcus, 09 Oct 2011, 14:14
"A,B&E", "Not In My Name" and "52FF" (flash fiction anthology) all available on Amazon Kindle"How a psychopath makes sweet love. I can get you ringside. Royal box even."
|
|
dancingsue
|
|
|
|
How do we know the printer is to blame? In my long experience of print, once a product has been proofed, the printer will simply print what has been supplied by the designer/editor who has formatted the book. It may have been supplied as a pdf file, most print-ready jobs are these days, for the very purpose of keeping it exactly as it was at proof stage. The printer cannot edit pdf files. Moreover, if the text has been set to justified or force-justified, that's when awkward splits, widows and orphans will appear. It still means checking every page before it goes to print.
the long and the short of it
|
|
Oxfordia
|
|
|
|
Quote: dancingsue, Sunday, 9 Oct 2011 15:57How do we know the printer is to blame? In my long experience of print, once a product has been proofed, the printer will simply print what has been supplied by the designer/editor who has formatted the book. It may have been supplied as a pdf file, most print-ready jobs are these days, for the very purpose of keeping it exactly as it was at proof stage. The printer cannot edit pdf files. Moreover, if the text has been set to justified or force-justified, that's when awkward splits, widows and orphans will appear. It still means checking every page before it goes to print. That's what I meant too.
|
Broken prom-ises.
09 Oct 2011, 12:09
