I know Ive mentioned this once or twice before but some time back, I made a short film that I submitted to various film festivals. The film's called Island Odyssey and focuses on the natural attractions of Kangaroo Island in South Australia. I know it might seem strange making a trailer for an 8 minute film but those are the rules set forth by some festivals. Eventually, after submitting my film to a bunch of festivals around the world, it was selected for screening at the Melbourne Documentary Film Festivals. By the way, this was the first time that Ive made a trailer so it was a new experience for me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn7eaBgaRkw&t=1s

Namussi, I'm sorry. Without even checking your name, I didn't even realise that you were the same person who made the first reply and the last reply. I found your initial reply very helpful. And your insight is definitely valuable with your past experience as a magazine editor. I just assumed that your second reply was from a different individual. Sorry, I should have checked the name. Ive re-edited my post.

This isn't about your surface tension image that we had the whole big long thread about?

Yea that's the one. I started this thread to get a few tips on how to sell direct.

Do some market research. Does the magazine you intend to submit your pic to actually publish pix by themselves without articles to go with them?

From what Ive observed, science magazines generally have articles accompanying the photographs.

Editors are usually interested in articles first, and pictures second.

Yea that was my assumption. In most cases with the science magazines Ive looked at, the photos merely illustrate the articles. In such cases, the images are indeed secondary. However, a number of times Ive also noticed instances where the photo is the main feature and the article is basically written about the photo.

They look for pix to illustrate articles. Of course, you might be lucky ... your picture might fit an article that the editor has commissioned.

Yea I had the plan to submit this image on it's own to a bunch of science magazines (minus an article) in the hope that it might be relevant to an article they are putting together in the near future. I know my chances are pretty slim.

Actually, I have written a very brief article about the science that goes on in my photograph but there's a reason why I won't submit it to the majority of science magazines. Because both the image (and the article) demonstrate an aspect of physics that is very basic science - more like stuff that school students would learn. Incidentally, the type of image that I have doesn't seem to be very common - I haven't seen too many other images that demonstrate the same principle in quite the same way (certainly none in SS, DT or the Science Photo Library stock agencies.) Though regardless of that, it is still very basic science.

Ive been reading through various articles in random science magazines and it seems pretty clear that they are not interested in basic or general science. They seem to prefer articles that focus on some new breakthrough or an exciting development in science or technology. So I was hoping that there could be a chance that my image (even though it demonstrates basic science) might somehow be related to the kinds of topics that tend to cover (again very slim chance of that happening, I admit.)

I think more realistically, it would be better to submit the image and article to science magazines that are targeted specifically towards kids and young people. The kinds of publications that have articles along the lines of 'how things work.' In other words - basic / general science. Though there doesn't seem to be many such magazines in circulation.

Alternatively, would textbooks be more interested in images without accompanying text?

But be careful: increasingly magazines assume that by paying you they get copyright of the image.

Oh yea I'm very wary of that. I would be specific in stating that this image would be for one time use or rights managed etc.

If your image is so extraordinary, why put it on a Rights Managed website like Alamy?

That way you can sell it again and again.

I thought I'd give the direct approach a go first. If I'm not successful, I'll put it on Alamy.

If it is a power thing, do you have an external powered USB hub to try?

It's actually connected to such a thing at the moment. Though I wonder if I would see an improvement if I connected the Pioneer unit directly to the mains power (might need to order a new part to do so.) Then again, it's designed to do it's job receiving power through usb.

Before, it was showing up intermittently. I tried it again today and the drive icon stayed onscreen the whole time. And it also showed up in Windows DVD Maker software as a selectable drive. I clicked on 'Burn' and the encoding process started. All was going well until the burning process began. At that point, a message appeared which said: "Cannot create the DVD. The CD / DVD device is no longer responding. Please make sure it is connected to the computer and powered on." At that point, it started making loud noises until I shut it down.

This thing is powered entirely by usb (there are two usb cables I have to connect.) I wonder if the issue could be not enough power is supplied via usb for the burning process? I think it is possible to plug it into the mains power but I don't think the necessary attachment came with the packaging.

I understand but did you know if you quit they will pay out what ever you've earned even if it doesn't meet the payout minimum?

I didn't realise that. That's much better than Dreamstime - they'll keep all your unpaid earnings if you leave them. I think I might keep uploading to iStock for a little while longer and just see how things go with regards to payments. If there is a sharp increase is 2c and 9c sales, then I might abandon them sooner rather than later.

I have no problem with the creative stills, they review them very fast, just in hrs. But I have three Editorial Still awaiting for review since March 29, it is normal to wait such a long time to get reviewed editorial photos in Istock?

That's quite a dilemma. I notice with a lot of stock agencies, editorial content gets reviewed quicker because there's a chance that the image may be newsworthy. So they do get higher priority overall. If iStock are having issues with editorial images, then that really makes them look incompetent and behind the competition. By the way, I don't submit editorial content to them anymore because their new website design prevented me from doing so. Well, it's their loss.

I have a very small port on SS but I notice a lot of my recent sales seem to be new and relatively recent photos. My last sale was with a photo that sold about 24 hours after it was uploaded.

For those who are concerned about the lack of sales of new photos - remember that in time, new photos will become old photos. So there's nothing to worry about!

so I'm curious to know why you would for any reason upload images in return for 15% royalties?

Dude seriously stop feeding them

I admit that receiving 9c sales is pitiful. I was planning on abandoning them once I reach my first payout.

My most recent submission to the ESP website was rejected. Though they don't call it a rejection. They state that the file was not accepted and it needs revision. I'm just trying to work out why it was rejected but there's no reason given. It's extremely rare when I get a rejection on iStockphoto so I'm curious to know what their reasoning is. Ive gone into the website but can't find any explanation. The photo features a person and I attached the model release form that can be found on Getty's website. Is there any way I can find out the rejection reason?

By the way, this same image was accepted by SS.

In todays climate I think you need to be sensitive about photographing young people

Definitely. It's actually pretty rare when I photograph children. And sometimes they accidentally enter the frame when I'm photographing something else. Of course if I was ever in a scenario where I photographed a child and the parent looked pretty annoyed or upset, I would not submit that photo for stock.