Not sure how scarce photos of this vulture are but they seem common on some nature sites

http://www.arkive.org/indian-vulture/gyps-indicus/image-G12929.html

Maybe this site?

http://images.sciencesource.com/search?function=query&gallery=8&key=Indian+Vulture

Interesting. I wonder how well that site sells. Surprisingly, I notice it doesn't have any pics of some localised species I just searched for.

Quote from: pkphotos on June 02, 2014, 08:04

A rare bird photo should be sold as RM and not RF. It is unlikely to get many sales but if someone does want it, there will probably be few photos to choose from. Therefore they should be forced to pay a decent amount for such a photo. This kind of photo is wasted on micro. Leave micro for very popular animals that sell over and over.

Can you suggest RM agencies, other than Alamy, mentioned above, which would accept one image?

Yes sorry, that is indeed the problem, finding where to put it. It's wasted in Alamy, so perhaps a science/nature type agency like the suggested link above

Honestly, if you say it wouldn't be accepted on SS, it wouldn't be accepted on any of the serious specialists. Like I said, most of them require at least 100/200 to get started, of species or behaviours they don't have already on their files, and lots require a commitment of so many new files in a certain period, like 100/3 months, or whatever.

I'm exclusive for RF on iStock, you can't opt out certain genres, and I sell RM on Alamy, but my sales are low there (I don't have much wildlife there).

I had a look at that ScienceSouce site's submission guidelines and contract, and they were very vague, though you had to direct them to a 'portfolio', which I'm guessing would be more than 'a few'.
I wouldn't worry one iota about its Alexa rank. There is hardly likely to be a flood of new people visiting specialist wildlife agencies. If they're any good, they'll be targetting only the specialised buyers, responding to want lists etc. They do say they send out lists of what's wanted.

I do see a lot of the UK specialist magazines. A lot of the articles are either written and photographed by the same person, providing a package, or a writer and photographer have collaborated on an article.
The bloke I mentioned before mostly submits directly to magazines (the strict ones that have to see the RAW file). I don't know if he writes, submits on spec, or if he is commissioned to take photos to illustrate already-commissioned articles. I have seen his pics published, but never anything he might have written.
I have to say also that a lot of these (not all) are published by wildlife charities and their photos are donated or bequeathed (they don't go out of date!) by supporters or taken by staff.

Thanks everybody, for all your helpful suggestions. I will upload the gyps on IS. On another note, I just wrote pied cuckoo on SS. HA, gotcha ! My shot is a 100 times better than the lone one on SS Though I don't think it's gonna sell a lot Not like there is a huge demand for pied cuckoos

Likewise for Mangrove Cuckoo: http://tinyurl.com/p6jg2th

Getting anything unique is just about impossible nowadays.

Quote from: ShadySue on June 03, 2014, 16:36

Likewise for Mangrove Cuckoo: http://tinyurl.com/p6jg2th
Getting anything unique is just about impossible nowadays.

Quite right. Which is why I shoot wildlife for the pure joy of it. Yep, I confess to being one of those infamous "hobbyists" (ie, retired after decades of doing some other job) that the "pros" around here get huffy about.

I'm sure most wildlife photographers do it for the love of it - they need the 'day job' to fund the equipment!

Looking at that page of Mangrove Cuckoo shots, I found a few that look exactly like mine. I take too much pride in my work to publish something like that in my name, even for an extremely rare species.

Guess we won't be seeing any of your work on #wildphotofail:
https://www.facebook.com/BBCSpringwatch/posts/654589081301270

Quote from: ShadySue on June 03, 2014, 18:17

Guess we won't be seeing any of your work on #wildphotofail:
https://www.facebook.com/BBCSpringwatch/posts/654589081301270

LOL!!! Nope. I have made plenty of shots exactly like those, Sue, but they quickly disappear into the trash. Not quite sure what the point of that page is, but...

Springwatch is a very popular UK TV programme and they have little fun items in their Springwatch Unsprung 'loose-format' programme afterwards.

That FB page is too funny. Love it!

You got that right, Shelma! And here I thought all my blurry outtakes had no possible use. Shows what I know.