How many of you guys self edit your books?

This topic always goes bananas.

Many of us self-edit with another set of eyes to look for typos. That can be a copy editor, a beta reader, etc. There are tools you can use, Autocrit, Grammarly, etc. to run your work through to make it stronger. You can take time away, print it out, read it backwards, have your computer read it to you etc.

Everyone has to make a balance between what their books are going to earn vs the expenses they incur to publish it. Most authors work up to paying top dollar for outside editing, some never do because their books sell well without the extra expense.

Basically, there's no right or wrong answer. Until you try it, and get some reader feedback or other author feedback, you won't know if you have the chops to self-edit your book. That doesn't mean you can't ever get to where you can self-edit, it may just mean you need to learn more about writing craft. Having an outline ahead of time to make sure your major story beats are strong can save a ton of heartache later when you find out your middle drags.

My process is to write everyday but edit yesterday's work to get me back into the groove before moving forward. By the time I am done with my rough draft I have edited at least twice.

My next process is to read through the manuscript, looking for holes in the plot, major changes, flaws, better explanations, maybe cutting back on too much description, etc. I find there are things I might need to rearrange.

When this is done, I'll go through it line by line polishing things up about 2-3 times. Line editing may turn into some rewrites here and there. I tend to cut back and take things out more than I add. I'll find places where i duplicate. For instance, I may say:

John grew angry with the latest news. "Dammit. That son-of-a-b*tch."
"Calm down," Frank said, trying to prevent John from coming unglued.

Then I can do this:

John grew angry with the latest news yelled, "Dammit. That son-of-a-b*tch."
"Calm down," Frank said. trying to prevent John from coming unglued.

To get me:

John yelled, "Dammit. That son-of-a-b*tch."
"Calm down," Frank said.

For me most of my edits are to reduce unnecessary clutter and repetition prior to outside editors. I cut my 2nd book 4,000 words between the rough draft and final copy. I'll cut full paragraphs sometimes if I think it may not fit.

Then I send my manuscript to an editor who goes through it line by line. As a first time reader they will open your eyes to things you may oversee. Things they will pickup on are pronoun usage. As a writer you know who is doing what but as a first time reader it may not be so clear, so you may need to make sure it's absolutely clear who, or what, is doing the action. Every single line needs to make sense and move the story along. They'll pick up on typos. For instance. I read through my manuscript 5 times and still didn't pick up on the fact that someone was trying to get "cell surface" and not "cell service". Someone also was trying to "Peer through the think bushes" and not "thick bushes." We tend to read what we know it's supposed to say. I even had written that there was a "cold due blanketing the ground" and not "dew".

Although consciously we know how to spell, there are things the writer will simply oversee.

My editor will offer suggestions, line by line. I can either accept or decline. Maybe they'll say things like "You don't need to mention this here, because you already did in the previous chapter."

Once I make the changes I wish to make, I resend it and then they go through it one more time. Picking up on typos, seeing if the changes worked well, and if they may have missed anything else.

Once this is done and I make changes, I thank them and then sit down and read through it a last time. Then I'm done.

My process is almost exactly like Steven's, but I go through two beta readers before the editor, then I have a beta reader who proofreads, and then it goes out for a final proofread.

I've been thinking, though, of cutting out the line editor. I'm seeing diminishing returns on the investment. My first couple books really benefitted, but the latter ones are coming back with more changes that I reject than accept. (I mean, there are fewer changes overall, so the ones I disagree with are now a higher percentage of them.) I'm not sure though if it's because I'm doing a better job line editing myself before it gets to the editor (I do try to learn from what the editors do) or if it's because of the editors themselves. The first couple of books were with a publisher; my editor there was great. The next two books, I used different freelancers for each--and it's just difficult to tell if they're less thorough or if I've improved thanks to my first editor. I have a book set to go to a whole new editor in March, and that's going to be the point where I decide whether the line editing still has value for me, or if I'd be fine just doing one more pass on the manuscript myself.

(I do have to say that one nice thing about having a line editor (and then a proofreader) is that I'm paying to not have to do that one more pass, which frees me up to work on more projects. I think the idea that self-editing lets you produce more faster is a little off: you produce more faster when you have someone else poring through your draft for problems. That's slow, tedious work!)

On the other hand, I've been considering trying a developmental editor because at this stage I'm more confident of my prose than I am of story, so if I do drop line editing, it will be to switch to a different type of editing service.

"Judging by how fast many of you produce your work it would appear that many of you self-edit as you go along."

Indeed. I try to keep everything grammatically correct as I go. But I am not fast. Writing is easy for me, plotting is like walking in mud, so I have time to read through and correct what I have done so far.

"I'm very interested in your editing process."

See above, plus multiple reads through, plus extra editing for problem sections that don't work.

"If you edit by yourself, can I ask why you do that?"

Have no desire to pay for something I can do better myself.
Throughout my career(s) I have never found anyone who can do better then me what I need done.
From mixing a good drum sound to taking a photograph that satisfies the brief.
No reason to believe things will be any different with writing.

"Do you feel that your work could benefit by having an objective outside editor looking at the things you write?"

Not really. First of all, nobody is objective. Because of that I only seek input that will reinforce my opinions, I never seek out opinions that differ from mine.
It's not simply a matter of ego, it is also because, for me, writing is not a group activity. It is me versus the world. It is the exact opposite of almost every other human endeavor. It is the only thing I own completely.
Of course when it comes to the business of writing I am complete putz. That's why I hang out here.