I made a quick comparison of about 20 different variations of text size, case, colour and additional graphics, and this one always drew me back. Just says it. The V's look good also.
If one of the team wants the file with editable text, same font etc, I can send it over, would be a .psd file.
I or someone else could put their mind to it to come up with something else (though I'd say not too complex or confusing, should be 'blink') before any change takes place, but I got to work now...
For now, I'm inclined to think the DPRevived name is fine.
If there's a problem, it's the fact that it is backward looking and assumes that everyone knows what DPReview is/was and what happened to it. Right now that's a reasonable assumption.
After some time has elapsed, however, new users who've never heard of DPReview are likely to find there way here and they will be apt to be puzzled, if not put off, by a name that doesn't seem to convey a whole lot and/or appears to be stuck in the past referencing something that (to them) seems like ancient history.
To the extent there's a problem it's that the more times passes and the more traction the site gets, the less relevant the "Revived" part of its address will become. It would be preferable to have something that is good for the transitional period (i.e. now and the next few months) but still has instant and immediately evident appeal long after that.
One of the nice things about the web is that multiple domain names can point to the same web site.
Should the name of this site be changed, the existing URL can be kept as an alternate name. That way, anyone who is looking for the current name will find the site.
If it is decided that the name should change, sooner is better than later. Every day, the site is building a reputation and name recognition. From a marketing perspective, you want to be building brand awareness for the long term name of the site.
As people recommend the site to others, you want them using the long term name, not a temporary one.
My suggestion is that if the name is to be changed, that change should happen as soon as a new name is chosen.
...yes, I think we're all pretty much in agreement with that. Though I'm still glad started this thread! - just to have a discussion about it, and get to this point.
There is still whether a subtle change to case (lower and upper) might be good.
All good points, and I agree, Michael.
The only consideration that I see that would count against making a change sooner rather than later --- apart from the need to get agreement among mods/admin about a new name --- is that it may contribute to the initial confusion. But all other considerations suggest that finding a suitable long term name sooner rather than later would be best.
We don't need to go very far. The name could be just DCReview.
I totally agree with this.
DPR Clone have just changed their name (to DPRforums), and I think it was a good move on their part, a better name - and made quickly (after asking the freshly arrived members for suggestions).
Here I sense members want to keep Revived for as long as possible, which is another approach but not ideal ...unless we are all think Revived is such a great name it's got to stay. There is 1000 members here already, not many at all. A change could happen now - if we want a new name and if we suggest a better one.
In a month there'll be 5,000+ members here, in two months 10,000 members or more if the name and the site works well (i.e. better than the other side) ...and this site gets into international news as the closure of DPR did.
I would have thought a thread to ask members for an alterative name would be good idea - perhaps with no closure date, to keep the decision of what and if with the team). But as I say I think there's a liking for Revived, which as you know I'm not keen on, but I'm open enough to accept it and there's more important things in life!!...
DPReview seems to have chosen their name to place primary focus on their role as a product reviewer in the "dp" space. Their forums seem to have been ancillary or an afterthought.
Unless there is an intention to make product reviews a primary focus here, having "Review" in the name will come off as misdirection (except insofar as it is a backward-looking nod to the former DPR - which is effectively the issue with dprevived that I commented on earlier in this discussion...).
what are we reviewing?
This will firstly and probably foremost be a forum site, not a gear review site (-as was DPR).
They seem to have changed it again to "dpdiscuss" at this point.
And in any case, their landing page seems to just be a menu that redirects to a bunch of facebook groups (eww - no thanks!).
I think it's a pity that their efforts will simply confuse and dilute, splitting the community exiting from DPR. I guess that can't be helped.
Meanwhile, as the Clone people only seem to have a landing page to worry about, name changes and consequent redirects may be a somewhat more trivial consideration for them.
Neat on a black background as well, with pale-grey 'dp' and a brighter blue,
It also keeps the url the same, so you don't loose anyone who's bookmarked it...
True, but this name has some traction now. After some time people will abbreviate and just say 'as I wrote on dpr at the time ...' which can only confuse for a fortnight in March / April 2023
Very good. I take the liberty to offer little change, based on your work:
My idea is to make dp part stand out and make it more compact, maybe even to resemble lens design drawing; so is conflict between font sizes not distracting anymore.
With some artistic touch (which I don't have) this dp can be used as site icon too.
just to say ...on another note, this plain text editor needs to be, and I hope will be, upgraded to rich-text soon, including quotes.
Quotes at present are a great tribulation in plain text - i.e. my response is included in your reply above. Ok, if we are 100% diligent in working out how this magic works we might be able to get quotes working every time, but currently this is a tricky method of replying.
/
Ok so looking again, yes as I thought, I still think there's too much space adjustment in your version. Moving forward, we might come up with an entirely different logo. For now, let's keep in here. On the whole, yes, maybe somewhere in-between.
The font which I think works well in it's symmetrical simplicity (check the rotation of 'd' and 'p' and those incredible V's making a point of the mirror about the i - EVIVE, is Gill Sans MT.
You mean quotes like this (I removed outer quote and images and some text - text between lines is quoted likely how you intended):
...I like your subtle shift. I'm even wondering what in-between, 50:50, would look like, or even 70:30 toward your spacing. Though sometimes just straight through is ok, all even spacing, if we dare. But yes maybe some very minor tweak on the kerning.
just to say ...on another note, this plain text editor needs to be, and I hope will be, upgraded to rich-text soon, including quotes.
Quotes at present are a great tribulation in plain text - i.e. my response is included in your reply above. Ok, if we are 100% diligent in working out how this magic works we might be able to get quotes working every time, but currently this is a tricky method of replying.
(text)
You are not used BBCode earlier? You can end quote with [/quote] and restart with [quote] or [quote="@username"] again. Sure this editor is mix of BBCode and Markdown - I have not found all tricks myself :)
