Are the Book's Made on the Farm?

[OldSkool]

It's typical for books to be edited using tracked changes in MS Word - this covers substantive editing (a.k.a developmental editing /comprehensive editing) and copy editing. Then, after the book has gone to the type setter there is a proof copy made that a proof reader looks over and marks corrections by hand. The proof read is a pretty fast process. The process utilized by the way international is simply not industry standard anymore. I work in the publishing industry.

To have departments doing an edit by colored pencil method is simply backwards and inefficient. Not to mention they take all the time they need to make everything "perfect." Meaning there is extensive fact checking, not with the bible as the revealed word of God, but with what is considered proven ministry research. The bible is used to proof scriptural quotes and that's about it. Otherwise, it all goes back to what's already been published by Victor Paul Wierwille and the way international.

And The Way International doesn't realize they are hopelessly outmoded!

Correct! They pat themselves on the backs as being the best in the world. I kid you not.

[Ham]

there are other reasons why NOT to put a document in electronic form..

once digital, it is VERY EASY to do a search of sorts to check for plagiarism..

but even at that, it's easy to scan it into a (damned) COMPUTER and still check for plagiarism..

[What About It]

I think if Rosie lived in the stone ages, she would have outlawed the use of pencils and insisted that it really wasn't "the best" if it wasn't carved in stone by your very own chisel. There's just something that the chisel provides that isn't there with the pen...

[Ham]

generally, spell-checker is about the last thing I use.. close to the time I'm ready to print something to take a serious look at. Gets rid of the blatant mis-spells.

Generally, unless one is a poor speller, its useless..

and spell checker hates technical writing. Dumb word will auto correct a constant that I purposely leave in lower case and put it in upper case.. there have been times I've put them all in upper case just so word will allow me to agree with myself.. tries to correct names of mathematicians who I cannot pronounce, but I know I've got the spelling correct..

sometimes one has to work around technology..

I used to type up stuff on DOS edit.. and I still would if the old Compaq lunchbox didn't die.

much easier. What you type was what you got..

I think if Rosie lived in the stone ages, she would have outlawed the use of pencils and insisted that it really wasn't "the best" if it wasn't carved in stone by your very own chisel. There's just something that the chisel provides that isn't there with the pen...

heh.. the problem here is rosie finding something worth impressing in stone..

[Linda Z]

OldSkool said:

It's typical for books to be edited using tracked changes in MS Word - this covers substantive editing (a.k.a developmental editing /comprehensive editing) and copy editing.

I don't work on books anymore, but I do work on a peer-reviewed academic (medical) journal. Our journal, and others whose "Instructions for authors" I've read, forbid the use of the "track changes" function of MS Word in submitted manuscripts. It can leave "artifacts" that mysteriously pop up during conversions from Word to the more complex publishing software, and if there are too many people adding their two cents, it can get confusing.

Then, after the book has gone to the type setter there is a proof copy made that a proof reader looks over and marks corrections by hand.

I didn't realize some publishers were still using typesetters. My friend, who was a book typesetter in NY for many years, found himself out of work once everyone had their own computers to generate text, so I thought typesetters were pretty much history. I haven't seen one since 1969. :D

The proof read is a pretty fast process. The process utilized by the way international is simply not industry standard anymore. I work in the publishing industry.

Me too....have done so for 30+ years. The proofreading step should be a fast process, if the editors and copy editors have done a thorough job. I agree that the use of all those different colors to designate every step in the process is overboard and a waste of time. But there is a place, IMO, for using different colors early in the editing process.

To have departments doing an edit by colored pencil method is simply backwards and inefficient.

As much as it irks me to defend anything even remotely connected to Rosalie Fox Rivenbark, I have to respectfully disagree. If there is more than one editor working on the same copy, using different colors identifies each editor's changes, so that a senior editor, the one who does the final approval of the edits, knows who did what and can ask, "Why did you change that?!?" when someone goes astray. I know that could be done with track changes, but I just don't like it. Personal preference, I guess.

When I train new editors, I do not just turn them loose with a computer so that they can change whatever they like willy-nilly. I want to see what they're doing and guide them in another direction if they're too heavy- or light-handed. Maybe I'm the one whose GS name should be "OldSkool." :D .

[socks]

You gon' wanna configure that stuff in MS word or it will indeed drive you nuts. Not make you nuts but actually tranport you to Nutzville.

To get out of Caps He ll - go to TOOLS > AUTOCORRECT and in the Auto Correct tab de-select "Capitalize first letter of sentences". Works like a champ in Word 2003 and all versions have a version of that in them, or long time now.

Course if we all had the newest iPhone 4 it would read our minds, transfer that info via satellite to every IP address in the world and automatically configure all programs to our current mood as we use them. Only if you're on a MAC OS and of course, own the iPhone 4 and don't own any Flash media or app's - in that case you will actually lose functionality in the brain upload and your mood will be adjusted by MAC headquarters so that your settings will reflect the needs of someone with lows standards and no creativity.

[OldSkool]

Maybe I'm the one whose GS name should be "OldSkool." :D .

I will sell you my alias...

[Linda Z]

I will sell you my alias...

Do you have change for a dollar?

[Ham]

You gon' wanna configure that stuff in MS word or it will indeed drive you nuts. Not make you nuts but actually tranport you to Nutzville.

To get out of Caps He ll - go to TOOLS > AUTOCORRECT and in the Auto Correct tab de-select "Capitalize first letter of sentences". Works like a champ in Word 2003 and all versions have a version of that in them, or long time now.

Course if we all had the newest iPhone 4 it would read our minds, transfer that info via satellite to every IP address in the world and automatically configure all programs to our current mood as we use them. Only if you're on a MAC OS and of course, own the iPhone 4 and don't own any Flash media or app's - in that case you will actually lose functionality in the brain upload and your mood will be adjusted by MAC headquarters so that your settings will reflect the needs of someone with lows standards and no creativity.

God Bless you socksie..

[OldSkool]

Do you have change for a dollar?

:eusa_clap:

[socks]

My pleasure Ham. Your description of doing the opposite and letting Word correct that - priceless.

The AI in most programs is - not so good yet. Although Adobe Photoshop is scarey good in it's current version.

This entire thread has been illuminating - lots of good stuff.

[chockfull]

Course if we all had the newest iPhone 4 it would read our minds, transfer that info via satellite to every IP address in the world and automatically configure all programs to our current mood as we use them. Only if you're on a MAC OS and of course, own the iPhone 4 and don't own any Flash media or app's - in that case you will actually lose functionality in the brain upload and your mood will be adjusted by MAC headquarters so that your settings will reflect the needs of someone with lows standards and no creativity.

And.... don't forget ..... your signal bars will be bigger.

[WordWolf]

generally, spell-checker is about the last thing I use.. close to the time I'm ready to print something to take a serious look at. Gets rid of the blatant mis-spells.

Generally, unless one is a poor speller, its useless..

and spell checker hates technical writing. Dumb word will auto correct a constant that I purposely leave in lower case and put it in upper case.. there have been times I've put them all in upper case just so word will allow me to agree with myself.. tries to correct names of mathematicians who I cannot pronounce, but I know I've got the spelling correct..

sometimes one has to work around technology..

I used to type up stuff on DOS edit.. and I still would if the old Compaq lunchbox didn't die.

much easier. What you type was what you got..

heh.. the problem here is rosie finding something worth impressing in stone..

Ever try typing in the older formats? TXT is still available for use, for example,

as is RTF. I prefer using TXT whenever I can just for the efficient use of space.

All my TXT files put together are probably about the size of ONE DOC file I have.

[socks]

Nothin' beats txt for simple elegance, that's for sure.

Bigger bars! In a world of high technology nothin' beats a little bit o' tape!

[OldSkool]

Word can be tweaked so it does not do all those little annoying things you guys are describing. I am happy to help out, PM me if you please.

Also:

http://www.editorium.com/

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pdf/author/Resources_File_cleaner.pdf

and for my friend LindaZ who says typesetting went the way of the dodo bird.

source: http://www.garlandscience.com/pdf/authorinstructions.pdf

If you can prepare your typescript on a computer, we can typeset from the files

you supply on disk. This will save time and reduce the likelihood of introducing

new errors into the text.You do not have to use a difficult or expensive wordprocessing

package and we do not ask you to use complicated codes: in fact, the

simpler the presentation of your text, the better.

Most production problems are caused by messy, badly prepared typescripts,

incomplete notes and references, poorly presented artwork and missing permissions.

Typescripts that are badly prepared are time-consuming and expensive

to produce. The clearer the typescript the more likely it is that the copy-editor

and typesetter will be able to do a good job. A typescript that is not adequately

prepared and presented may be returned to you for attention. Similarly, typescripts

that are over the contracted length may be returned for cutting.

To set and correct type is expensive. Once your book is set, it is not possible to

make any corrections other than typesetter’s errors, or essential updating where,

for example, new legislation has invalidated your conclusions. All corrections and

improvements to style and construction must be made before the typescript is

submitted to Taylor & Francis.We reserve the right not to implement any proof

corrections that we feel should have been incorporated in the typescript.

Alternatively, excess correction costs may be charged against your royalty

account.

LindaZ - I appreciate your insight and it goes to show that what has become the defacto standard in the publishing industry does not necessarily mean that everyone uses those methods. Most of the work my company handles are larger books, although we do work through some journals from time to time. The traditional publishing houses we contract from seem to have the same methods.

Again, back to the way international, my disagreement with their methodology derives not from it being the wrong way to do it but the claim that their method is the best in the world when in fact they are very inefficient at what they do. It's the big fat claim they make and then the justification that comes into play because they are working off of other's donations. Plus, the sneering at technology is really unprofessional. With the proper training and process implementation software applications can be very beneficial and produce the same level of detail as a colored pencil system.

Edited August 7, 2010 by OldSkool

[Linda Z]

OldSkool, I was surprised that instructions for authors in the last link you posted still called for paper submissions with disks. The journal I manage doesn't even accept hard-copy submissions anymore. For the past two years we've used an online submission system. It's a bit cumbersome and buggy, but it's better than receiving all the tattered and torn envelopes from around the world, filled with four copies of every manuscript and four copies of every photo/illustration.

Back to the subject at hand, what I find amazing is RFR's aversion to computers. One of the last things I did in Way Pub in 1986 was take a class from the IT dept. on using a computer. My memory's kind of fuzzy, but I think the brand was Leading Edge. What happened to all those computers? (Of course, those particular computers are probably in a computer museum somewhere (:D), but I do find it amazing that they don't use computers for any part of the editing process.)

I vaguely remember VPW pitching a fit when a Way Mag cover featured a (posed) photo of a family sitting around a computer with their open Bibles and concordances, apparently using the computer to research the Bible. I forget what his objection was, but he was steamed.

Heck, my almost-91-year-old dad, until he became ill a month ago, did all his correspondence via e-mail and was a frequent EBay buyer and seller of items he collects.

Get with it, Rosie the Pivoter! This is not 1959.

[Jim]

You know, VP's personal secretary, I forget her name, used a dumb terminal connected to the "mainframe" for VP's correspondence back in 1980. So it's not like his holiness thought they were evil then...

[Calavicci]

Back to the subject at hand, what I find amazing is RFR's aversion to computers.

That is boneheadedly stupid. Even by her logic she should be thinking, "Hey the adversary uses the internet, so why don't we turn it against him and use it to move God's Word"

But noooooo. Their idea of high-tech is freaking DVD's, which are hardly cutting-edge.

Just a couple of years ago, me and my wife order this audio class called "Keys to Financial Liberty", thinking it'd be CD's. Nope. Apparently TWI's warehouse is still full of unused blank CASSETTES! That's right, in 2008 they're sending out audio tapes, which I can't even play. Pfft, what a ripoff.

I guess downloading teachings on MP3 will be a long time coming, if they make it that long.

[What About It]

OldSkool, I was surprised that instructions for authors in the last link you posted still called for paper submissions with disks.

I also am a professional editor/proofreader, and in proofreading sometimes publishers will send me the author's hard-copy manuscript along with the proofs, especially if the copy editor made a lot of changes or for ESL authors. I've proofed books before that I've needed to refer to the author's ms just to see what the au's original wording, meaning, or spelling was. So these are sometimes still used for reference, but not for actual editing. And yes, when multiple editors work on a document, they need to use different colors--but not pencils. Different colors on screen, yes; on paper, no.

Apparently TWI's warehouse is still full of unused blank CASSETTES!

TWI is so afraid that changing their technology might cause them to lose followers in developing countries that their lack of updating technology is causing them to lose followers in the developed countries. At least they say they don't want to leave people behind. I still think it comes down to money. Newer technology = more money.

[Linda Z]

You know, VP's personal secretary, I forget her name, used a dumb terminal connected to the "mainframe" for VP's correspondence back in 1980. So it's not like his holiness thought they were evil then...

Just to clarify, he didn't say anything about computers being evil. He objected to using them for researching the Bible. Personally, although I love books and have a houseful, I find it much easier to look up something in the Bible in an online version, rather than pulling out a huge concordance.

[Linda Z]

What About it said:

I also am a professional editor/proofreader, and in proofreading sometimes publishers will send me the author's hard-copy manuscript along with the proofs, especially if the copy editor made a lot of changes or for ESL authors. I've proofed books before that I've needed to refer to the author's ms just to see what the au's original wording, meaning, or spelling was. So these are sometimes still used for reference, but not for actual editing. And yes, when multiple editors work on a document, they need to use different colors--but not pencils. Different colors on screen, yes; on paper, no.

Sorry to derail the thread further, but it's nice to "meet" another editor.

We keep the file for the manuscript intact so that we can refer back to the original as needed, and we edit on a separate file.

Welcome, Cal! I can't believe they're still sending out casettes. They probably have a warehouse full of them. Congrats on your decision to "fade out." That's what I did when I left. I sure didn't miss all the mandatory meetings and classes!!!

[OldSkool]

Just to clarify, he didn't say anything about computers being evil. He objected to using them for researching the Bible. Personally, although I love books and have a houseful, I find it much easier to look up something in the Bible in an online version, rather than pulling out a huge concordance.

This must be where the current board of dummies get the idea. Now, it has turned into this romanticized idea of "biblical research" being someone sitting in a library, with a table full of books and a bible opened up as they take notes in the little spiral notebook. Of course no research actually happens at HQ any longer. Biblical re-search is what they do now, comparing new teachings with old ones to make sure no one is contradicting proven ministry research. After all, once it's proven true there it is considered truth and truth does not change. Hold up...I need a little more kool-aid

[Ham]

That is boneheadedly stupid. Even by her logic she should be thinking, "Hey the adversary uses the internet, so why don't we turn it against him and use it to move God's Word"

But noooooo. Their idea of high-tech is freaking DVD's, which are hardly cutting-edge.

Just a couple of years ago, me and my wife order this audio class called "Keys to Financial Liberty", thinking it'd be CD's. Nope. Apparently TWI's warehouse is still full of unused blank CASSETTES! That's right, in 2008 they're sending out audio tapes, which I can't even play. Pfft, what a ripoff.

I guess downloading teachings on MP3 will be a long time coming, if they make it that long.

but I thought they'd run off all of those who even had the technical aptitude to run those machines..