Ah yes ... we work for money, don't we?
And we should. After all, you wouldn't choose to spend your afternoon writing a press release announcing ACME Balloon Rental's new vice president of inflation instead of working on your novel, would you? Nor would you pop out of bed in the morning thinking, "Finally, today I get to write a brochure about widgets instead of finishing my screenplay!"
The fact is, as freelance writers, we work to eat, and to eat, we must charge for our work. But there's the rub: What should we charge?
Let's cut to the chase. I currently base my fees on $75 per hour for anything clients ask me to do, whether it's writing, ghostwriting or editing. It doesn't matter whether it's for a brochure, Web site, book, press release or what. It's $75 per hour. (That rate is higher than some writers charge and less than others charge. The geographical market has a lot to do with it.)
My fees are almost never discussed when I work with repeat clients. They know what to expect and seem to be okay with it. If it looks like a project is going to cost more than the client is used to, I bring this up for approval. The last thing I want is to give a good client an unpleasant surprise when he or she opens my bill.
My fees are always discussed with new clients. I usually don't tell them what I charge per hour. That really tells them little, because it's only half of the equation. One writer might take five hours to do the project while another would take 10 hours. So simply saying "I charge $75 per hour" means nothing. That's why with new clients I estimate what I would charge for a project, based on all the information I have been given. I also let the client know to expect changes in the estimate if the project's parameters change midstream. An up-front estimate eliminates sticker shock when the client receives the invoice. (By the way, you could call it a "bid," but I like "estimate" because it seems a bit more pliable.)
Ultimately, of course, you can only charge what the market will bear, but the fee structure I've just described has worked for me for years. I have, of course, periodically raised my rate.
Don't be afraid to turn down clients who aren't willing to pay you what you're worth. If you keep saying yes to these people, you will get locked into a low-level of clientele and will always be underpaid. Believe me, there are companies and individuals out there who are willing to pay the price for a good writer. If you are a good writer, you just have to find them. But you won't find them if you're swamped with jobs that keep you perpetually unpaid and overworked.
I have a pet peeve: writers who low-ball their rates just to get work. They make life difficult for other hardworking, professional freelancers, and ultimately they cut their own throats. I recently went online to check out what writers were charging and being offered for online articles and content. I was appalled and frankly infuriated to read that some online publishers were offering 1/10th of one cent per word! Once cent per word was fairly standard. That sort of compensation is a slap in the face to serious writers, and any writer who accepts it is doing real damage to the profession as a whole.
Let's put things in perspective: Yesterday a garage door repairman charged me $89 to fix one of our garage door openers. He spent - I'm not exaggerating - less than five minutes! The day before, my sister paid a plumber $180 to fix a leaking connection. He spend just over 30 minutes on the job. And they're asking writers to work for maybe $2 per hour? And some writers will do it? I can't think about this without wanting to break something.
One last thought. Some writers wonder whether to charge on a per-word basis. This may work for magazine articles and the like, but is lunacy for most types of projects. It doesn't take into account the time you might spend on research and in meetings, or the approval process and other variables.
I once spent three days in meetings and creative time to come up with a small college's three-word billboard headline. Had I charged per word, I would have had to charge over $400 per word. Had I told the client that I would charge $400 per word, I wouldn't have landed the job. But telling them that I would charge about $1200 for three days of work seemed reasonable to them. And it was. In fact, it was a steal. They used the headline for years in all their marketing materials.
In my dreams, I regularly get $400 per word for 2,000-word travel articles ... in my dreams
About the author: Steve Osborne is author of "Writing Tips for the Real World," a blog at http://www.thewritersbag.com . He is an award-winning freelance writer and writing instructor. His blog teaches writing tips, techniques and strategies designed to help people from all walks of life turn the written word into a powerful success tool in their careers and personal lives.
7.6.09
Typography: Italics - When You Should Use Them
Art of Typography. The purpose of italic typefaces is to aid comprehension by separating off certain words and phrases from their surrounding text. But when exactly should you use italics?
The basic purpose in typesetting a story or article for a book, newspaper or periodical, for print or online, is to enhance understanding of the text and thereby make the reading an easy, pleasant experience.
Roman type is the straightforward, upright type we read everyday in our newspapers, magazines and books, and on our monitors.
Italic is the 'handwriting' equivalent of whatever roman font we are reading. It has a sloping cursive quality that reminds us of the manual writing we learned in primary school.
Bold type is roman or italic font that has been emphasized by thickening and making it darker than the surrounding text.
The question is: when should we use which version of a particular typeface - roman, italic, or bold? The answer must focus on the reader's needs and the reading experience.
It is obvious that for most copy the roman version of the chosen font should be used. This is because, having an upright face, it is the easiest to read and it is what readers expect.
Because the bold version of a font makes text stand out strongly, it is used for highlighting important words, phrases and sections. Thus headlines, decks and subheads set in bold will, along with pull-quotes and other tricks of the typesetter's art, provide the casual scanner with clues as to what your article or story is all about. The judicious use of bold in this way will induce him or her to read the main story.
Bold however is too strong to be used, except very occasionally, within body text. To set off words from surrounding text is the main function of italics.
So when should you use italics exactly? Here's a sort of check-list, a mixture of accepted practice and my personal opinion.
Credit: sandbaum
Most of these when-to-use-italics rules apply equally to words in body copy, head-lines and captions, and whether you are typesetting books, articles, stories or web-pages.
[1] The names of ships and aircraft; eg: The Caribbean Cruiser sank yesterday. This is the oldest when-to-use-italics rule. It allows the reader to quickly grasp what is being referred to in the message.
[2] The titles of poems; eg: As You Go Dancing by James Stewart is famous among the literati of the Arabian Gulf. This is another very traditional use of italics that enables quick reader-uptake.
[3] Foreign words; eg: We turned left and found ourselves in a cul de sac. Another very traditional use of italics that makes for quicker reading.
[4] The titles of books, newspapers, articles and stories occurring within a sentence without further explanation; eg: The Saturday edition of the Limerick Leader was always on the streets by Friday afternoon.
However titles that appear within larger works are not italicized but are set off in quotation marks; eg: 'An Irishman's Diary' in the Irish Times is sometimes interesting.
[5] Latin phrases used to classify living things; eg: Many people wonder why mankind is referred to as homo sapiens. Another use of italics that has been around ab aeterno.
[6] Where a word is used as an example rather than for its meaning; eg: The word Kennedy is a proper noun. This is neater than setting the noun within single quotes as in: The word 'Kennedy' is a proper noun.
[7] For introducing new terms; eg: In Freudian psychology reference is made to the ego, the super-ego, and the id. This is a neat solution to highlighting words that will probably be explained later.
[8] For the subjects of definitions; eg: An odd number is any number that cannot be divided by two. This is useful for the reader as, should he or she wish to refer back to the definition later, a word in italics among a sea of roman letters is easy to find.
[9] For mathematical symbols: eg: The standard acceleration of gravity g is 9.81183 metres per second per second. The symbol does not need to be surrounded by commas or single quotes which would be required if it were set in roman type.
[10] For emphasis; eg: Janice wasn't the only girl at the party. The use of italics for emphasis is less intrusive than bold and more subtly suggestive.
[11] To indicate a character's internal reflections in stories; eg: This just does not seem right, Janice thought. However many writers prefer other ways of expressing inner thoughts.
[12] Using a letter or number as a noun; eg: He was vexed because they had left out the d in his name. However many writers would prefer to put a letter or number used in this way between quotes: eg; He was vexed because they had left out the 'd' in his name.
That's about it for the when-to-use italics rules. Except, what should you do if you need to use italics within italics?
If some word or phrase that should be italicised is already within a run of italics, the trick is to switch back to roman type for that word or phrase; eg: I'm in a really weird situation, Janice thought.
This italics-within-italics solution works best when italics are used to highlight internal reflections; eg: Why can't we just look up Wikipedia for the answer? he wondered to himself.
Of course, you don't have to follow these when-to-use-italics rules. However most of them are in current use because they do aid reader comprehension.
Indeed, most of us have an instinct as to when the use of italics is appropriate. Perhaps you can devise better rules of your own. If so, let me know.
About the Author: Paul D Kennedy (paulkpg@yahoo.ie) is a freelance writer of articles and stories. He offers a complete service - research, writing, editing and proofing - for corporate newsletters and commercial magazines on http://www.writingservices.eu .
The basic purpose in typesetting a story or article for a book, newspaper or periodical, for print or online, is to enhance understanding of the text and thereby make the reading an easy, pleasant experience.
Roman type is the straightforward, upright type we read everyday in our newspapers, magazines and books, and on our monitors.
Italic is the 'handwriting' equivalent of whatever roman font we are reading. It has a sloping cursive quality that reminds us of the manual writing we learned in primary school.
Bold type is roman or italic font that has been emphasized by thickening and making it darker than the surrounding text.
The question is: when should we use which version of a particular typeface - roman, italic, or bold? The answer must focus on the reader's needs and the reading experience.
It is obvious that for most copy the roman version of the chosen font should be used. This is because, having an upright face, it is the easiest to read and it is what readers expect.
Because the bold version of a font makes text stand out strongly, it is used for highlighting important words, phrases and sections. Thus headlines, decks and subheads set in bold will, along with pull-quotes and other tricks of the typesetter's art, provide the casual scanner with clues as to what your article or story is all about. The judicious use of bold in this way will induce him or her to read the main story.
Bold however is too strong to be used, except very occasionally, within body text. To set off words from surrounding text is the main function of italics.
So when should you use italics exactly? Here's a sort of check-list, a mixture of accepted practice and my personal opinion.
Most of these when-to-use-italics rules apply equally to words in body copy, head-lines and captions, and whether you are typesetting books, articles, stories or web-pages.
[1] The names of ships and aircraft; eg: The Caribbean Cruiser sank yesterday. This is the oldest when-to-use-italics rule. It allows the reader to quickly grasp what is being referred to in the message.
[2] The titles of poems; eg: As You Go Dancing by James Stewart is famous among the literati of the Arabian Gulf. This is another very traditional use of italics that enables quick reader-uptake.
[3] Foreign words; eg: We turned left and found ourselves in a cul de sac. Another very traditional use of italics that makes for quicker reading.
[4] The titles of books, newspapers, articles and stories occurring within a sentence without further explanation; eg: The Saturday edition of the Limerick Leader was always on the streets by Friday afternoon.
However titles that appear within larger works are not italicized but are set off in quotation marks; eg: 'An Irishman's Diary' in the Irish Times is sometimes interesting.
[5] Latin phrases used to classify living things; eg: Many people wonder why mankind is referred to as homo sapiens. Another use of italics that has been around ab aeterno.
[6] Where a word is used as an example rather than for its meaning; eg: The word Kennedy is a proper noun. This is neater than setting the noun within single quotes as in: The word 'Kennedy' is a proper noun.
[7] For introducing new terms; eg: In Freudian psychology reference is made to the ego, the super-ego, and the id. This is a neat solution to highlighting words that will probably be explained later.
[8] For the subjects of definitions; eg: An odd number is any number that cannot be divided by two. This is useful for the reader as, should he or she wish to refer back to the definition later, a word in italics among a sea of roman letters is easy to find.
[9] For mathematical symbols: eg: The standard acceleration of gravity g is 9.81183 metres per second per second. The symbol does not need to be surrounded by commas or single quotes which would be required if it were set in roman type.
[10] For emphasis; eg: Janice wasn't the only girl at the party. The use of italics for emphasis is less intrusive than bold and more subtly suggestive.
[11] To indicate a character's internal reflections in stories; eg: This just does not seem right, Janice thought. However many writers prefer other ways of expressing inner thoughts.
[12] Using a letter or number as a noun; eg: He was vexed because they had left out the d in his name. However many writers would prefer to put a letter or number used in this way between quotes: eg; He was vexed because they had left out the 'd' in his name.
That's about it for the when-to-use italics rules. Except, what should you do if you need to use italics within italics?
If some word or phrase that should be italicised is already within a run of italics, the trick is to switch back to roman type for that word or phrase; eg: I'm in a really weird situation, Janice thought.
This italics-within-italics solution works best when italics are used to highlight internal reflections; eg: Why can't we just look up Wikipedia for the answer? he wondered to himself.
Of course, you don't have to follow these when-to-use-italics rules. However most of them are in current use because they do aid reader comprehension.
Indeed, most of us have an instinct as to when the use of italics is appropriate. Perhaps you can devise better rules of your own. If so, let me know.
About the Author: Paul D Kennedy (paulkpg@yahoo.ie) is a freelance writer of articles and stories. He offers a complete service - research, writing, editing and proofing - for corporate newsletters and commercial magazines on http://www.writingservices.eu .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
