What format do you commonly use to send a manuscript to a beta reader?
A readable one?
Ask the reader what formats they can open and read and what their preferred format is, then act accordingly.
I use .txt, .pdf, .mobi, and .epub, created with Scrivener. The majority of readers use either the PDF or ePub versions.
If you're willing, what do they provide? Just proofing? More? And where do you use them in your process?
what do they provide? Just proofing? More? And where do you use them in your process?
I think you better define your concept of a Beta Reader.
The traditional Beta Reader doesn't do proofing or editing. They don't even look for things like plot holes (Development Editor). The Beta Reader is someone similar to your target audience who reads the completed novel before it is published to the masses. Think of them as a Focus Group in marketing. You want to know how your novel will go over with your target audience. The response from your Beta Readers should tell you that.
So the format of your manuscript that you send to someone doing proofing is different than the format sent to the Beta Reader I described.
that's exactly what I what i think of as a beta reader. A focus group person is a great definition.
Hi, Switch Blayde, and thanks for chipping in. I recognize your definition of a beta reader. I just get the impression that it is not as standard as some might suggest, and Michael Louck's response below seems to support my thought that, in practice, it's often more flexible.
As I've understood it, in traditional publishing, beta readers are often the last step before publishing. They get the book after the editing and proofing is done. Hopefully, if the author and the editing team understood their market, the response is positive and its all systems go. But, if not, if the response indicates that it missed the mark in someway or that the readers are responding to something that requires reworking, then the decision could be made to pull back and rewrite. Am I close?
It just seems to me that, of indie authors -- especially the amateur types that make up a big chunk of SOLs contributors, that kind of response is important much earlier. Not only are we inexperienced, but often folks here are writing "what they want to write," which means their work is often way outside of established genres. So, it seems to me that thoughtful feedback from potentially interested readers is important much earlier in the process to answer the question, "Do I have a story here that's worth the effort?" I know some one say just to write it anyway and put it out there, but others of us are more interested in making sure we can finish a story first, and we'd rather get some feedback on that story along the way.
So, let me just make my suggestion. We need more... something. Maybe "Response Readers" would be a good term. People who are NOT just looking for grammar errors or awkward wording -- maybe even who are ignoring that, and just reading for STORY -- Characters, Plot, Narrative Drive, Pacing. I'd be a lot more comfortable fixing grammar, polishing sentences and paragraphs, even fixing plot holes or pacing problems, if I knew the basic elements of story I had produced grabbed at least some folks.
Just proofing? More? And where do you use them in your process?
While you'd expect schoolboy errors to be reported, I think proofing is more than you can reasonably expect from beta readers. I'd be very surprised if they tried to return mark-up copies.
AJ
If you're willing, what do they provide? Just proofing? More? And where do you use them in your process?
Everything from spelling or grammar errors to continuity errors to fact-checking. I use them in the process of writing a book, chapter-by-chapter. That means the books are edited, proofread, and beta read, revealing most (but not all) errors.