Copyediting vs proofreading: what’s the difference?
Whether you’re an experienced author or completely new to writing, you will have likely heard the terms ‘copyediting’ and ‘proofreading’, and know they’re part of the publishing process. In the below article I will aim to explain the broad differences between them, which you need, and when each happens.
What is copyediting?
Copyediting is a detailed review of your manuscript before it is published. While I certainly focus on correcting spelling, grammar and punctuation, a good copyedit goes beyond simply looking for mistakes.
I will look at the clarity and consistency of your writing, as well as things such as sentence structure, repetition, word choice and inconsistencies in terminology. I will also check that your manuscript follows a consistent style.
For example, are character names always spelled in the same way? Are headings formatted consistently? Have you used hyphens in the same way throughout? If you have included dates, numbers, quotations or references, are these presented consistently?
I am also reading for meaning. If a sentence is confusing, an argument doesn't quite follow, or something seems to be missing, these are things I can flag for you during the copyedit.
This is one of many reasons why copyediting is much more than simply ‘checking the grammar’.
What is proofreading?
Proofreading happens later in the publishing process. In professional contexts this is once the manuscript has been typeset and turned into its final page layout, but for self-publishing this can happen in the Word file rather than a PDF.
The proofreader's job is to check the book for final errors that have either remained in the manuscript or been introduced during typesetting. They will look for things such as spelling mistakes, punctuation errors, missing words, incorrect page numbers, formatting problems and inconsistencies in the layout. I will also check that headings, captions, tables and other elements have been presented correctly.
So which one do you need?
Ideally both, but if your manuscript has never been professionally edited, copyediting is usually the more important first step.
A proofreader isn't there to rewrite sentences, improve the structure of your argument or point out that a particular section doesn't make sense. By the proofreading stage, those decisions should already have been made.
If you send a first-draft manuscript straight to a proofreader like me, you may therefore end up with a technically clean book that could still benefit from considerable editorial work.
Ideally, copyediting comes first and proofreading comes afterwards.
Do you always need both?
Not necessarily.
If your manuscript has already been thoroughly copyedited and you are preparing it for publication, proofreading is an important final check. It is particularly valuable because authors become very familiar with their own writing, meaning it can be surprisingly difficult to spot small errors.
However, if your budget doesn't stretch to both services, it may make sense to prioritise copyediting. A copyedit can address the wider issues in your writing as well as correcting errors, whereas proofreading is much more focused on the finished document.
The bottom line
The simplest way to think about it is:
Copyediting improves the manuscript. Proofreading checks the finished book.
They are different stages, with different purposes, but ideally you would have both.
But every book and every author is different. You may already have had a development edit, you may have edited the manuscript yourself over several years, or you may simply be working within a limited budget.
If you're not sure which service you need, that's something I can help you work out. You can get in touch with me here to discuss further.
Before starting any editing, I’d be happy to look at your manuscript and discuss what level of editorial support would be most useful.
The important thing is that your book gets the right level of attention at the right stage – without paying for editorial work you don't actually need.