Sean, Ive just browsed your site. I like your portraits (especially from a lighting point of view.)

I've got quite a bit of medium-format film on SS - one of my best sellers among them - file number 68871745 shot on a Pentacon Six. Another was shot on a 1930s folding camera (B&W, that one, so no CA problems). So they will accept it.
The real issue with film is the quality of scanning. I spent a lot of time learning how to scan manually on an Epson V500. Automated scanning is no use at all, it simply doesn't deliver the best quality - even from one of the best specialised film processors in the UK (I've compared their scans with what I can achieve, and it's like a P&S vs a 6MP DSLR).

Ah nice! Mine was shot with a Koni Omega Rapid so likely 60s or 70s vintage. The scan is of Fuji Velvia 100 and it was accepted by SS and iStockphoto no problem. However, Dreamstime wouldn't accept it, stating that there was some technical problem with the file. It was scanned by a lab, not myself. Generally when I use medium format, I use slow speed and medium speed film. Though Ive also submitted some scans of 35mm film that happened to be 200asa and 400asa and they tend to be too grainy for the stock sites except for iStockphoto who accepted them.

maybe you could approach scientific journals etc? In the same way that if I were a less moral person if I had a pic of a celebrity in an embarrassing position I would probably go to the newspapers rather than putting it up for general sale ;-)

Ah I like that idea - the direct approach. Regarding scientific journals and magazines, I wonder if a submitted image by itself could lead to possible publication or whether it would need to be accompanied by a written article? I guess at the very least, I could write a body of text explaining the scientific principles that are demonstrated in the image (even though it's very basic science.) I guess journals would be after more higher level, complex scientific stuff (probably read by professionals etc.) Whereas a science magazine maybe targeted towards hobbyists and amateurs and might cover more general scientific themes (including basic science.) I wish my Dad was still around - he was a scientist. He might have known of some publications I could submit to. The next time I go to a newsagent, I'll look out for some science magazines.

you had to keep a note if the file had sold before, as this might restrict exclusive uses, which are extremely rarely asked for on Alamy (e.g. I've been asked twice to confirm that images hadn't sold before and even though I was able to assert that they hadn't sold anywhere, neither sale went ahead).

I'm considering maybe joining Alamy. There are two images that I currently have on microstock sites that I'm thinking of removing and submitting to Alamy. I'll probably leave the rest of my photos on micro. These two photos did not sell through microstock but they have each been sold in exhibitions with large physical prints being purchased. Also one of them was published in a magazine though not as stock (it won a photography competition.) Would any of this cause any issues?

you could well end up making a lot more than through a micro sale thanks to DACS...

Is that the British Journal of Photography? I'll have to look more into them.

how does 'other people having seen the image' dispute the possibility that 'it isn't really as interesting as you think it is'?

Interesting to who? Interest is subjective. The image is interesting to me as it is to the other people I have shown it to. Therefore it's likely that it will be interesting to other people too. Though it may not hold the same level of interest for everybody as we all have different tastes and preferences. Like I said, you can't please everyone. We're all individuals.

By the way, despite being an avid reader of photography books and magazines for a number of years, I haven�t come across too many images like mine. I do have two books which each feature a very similar kind of image � one of those being a very nice example. Even a google image search didn�t find too many of these kinds of images. And I couldn�t find any such image in the Science Photo Library (yes there were photographs in there that demonstrated surface tension but nothing like mine.) So what I have produced is certainly not common.

And regarding refraction, there is certainly nothing unique about how it's portrayed here but what i think makes it rather special, in my opinion, is that the refraction is temporary, or momentary. The refraction in this image only existed for a fraction of a second (resulting from a disturbance in the surface tension.) It was impossible to see this in real time and I just happened to trip the shutter at the right moment.

Sure it would demonstrate tension.  You can see the water clinging to the straw as well as to the sides of the glass. 

Woops, I stand corrected. Though it's not as dramatic as my image in regards to demonstrating these scientific principles. Sure, my photo may not have the same level of interest or appeal to everyone. We're all individuals with different tastes and you can't please everyone. Though I will say one thing - in all my 20+ years of photography, I can't recall ever being as lucky as I was with this image.

The BBC doesn't necessarily pay high prices

No surprises there. The BBC once contacted me through youtube - asking me if they could use one of my videos for a childrens TV show. They wanted the footage for free. Not only that but they wanted me to sign away my rights to the footage to them. Glad I didn't do business with them on that occasion. And that's not an isolated incident. Ive heard of other instances of the BBC asking other people for free use of their footage. And on those occasions, the video shooters rightfully refused.

I looked into this a little bit a while ago - it seems most sites want a hundred or more images to start with.

Oh darn, I didn't realise that. I hope there are some exceptions. Most of my images that I intend on selling have gone into microstock already.

I'm a contributor that submits photos to a few microstock sites like SS, DT, Fotolia etc. At present, I have pretty small portfolios on all of them but they are growing. I have a photograph which I have not uploaded as yet and in my view, it is kind of special. It demonstrates two principles of physics - water surface tension and refraction. Now there are many photographs where you can see refraction - they are very common. Though there doesn't seem to be too many photographs that show surface tension being disrupted in the way that I have captured. There are such images out there but there doesn't seem to be a lot of them. And so far, I haven't come across another photograph that demonstrates both surface tension and refraction together in quite the same way as my image does. There could well be others that do.

Originally, I was going to submit this image to the usual microstock sites but if it's as rare as I think it is, it would be a shame to sell it for 25c or a $1. Just wondering what other options could there be for selling it? Not surprising, I think it would likely have some appeal within the field of science. I haven't really explored the macrostock / RM options in any detail. Would there be any other options out there?

Same here, looks like a comeback of DT: during the last 3 months I made more than in the entire year 2016.

Good news for you. For me, it's the complete opposite. I do admit that I have a very small portfolio on Dreamstime but for me, the sales from 2016 were roughly 10x better than 2017. This year, it's pretty much dead over there for me.

Quote from: Thomas from France on March 30, 2017, 14:30

DT dead here...a long time ago.

Yes, DeadTime�

Lol. I always thought 'Dreamstime' was an unusual name for a stock photo agency. Perhaps they're in a deep slumber right now.

At the moment, I'm browsing Dreamstime's forums without being logged on and I notice something odd. In posts that Ive made, my avatar is blank / not visible at all. Though other members' avatars are visible. The information about my number of uploads and sales is still visible when I move the cursor below my user name.

For a moment there, I thought I had been banned or kicked out. But I found out that I can sign in on a laptop but not on my usual pc.