...but the last couple of paragraphs there were mine, though weren't shown quoted, they looked like you'd written them. Or are you showing me how I could have quoted? - in which case you are me, in which case this is even weirder, ...even though you have the power to be me.
...the quote broke, ok maybe this is user error due to needing to enter code - or make sure code is not broken and then say a prayer or a magic spell,
but we are not the coders.
We need a rich-text editor and robust quote system.
Yet all this has gone OT again, not about the site's name / appearance.
Agree totally. BBCode + Markdown is powerful combo, but very easy to break. Quoting always full postings works, but eats screen space and makes all thread unreadable. For readability I suggested to limit quote window height, but this doesn't help with partial quoting difficulties.
OK. Not saying this is a plan, but I've secured DPRev.com - nice, short and simple. So if DPRevived becomes a liability, we just drop the 'ived'. So, if people are designing logos, how about one which is DPRevived, with a droppable 'ived'.
At some time we'll put 'DPRev' in as an alternate uRL, but not right now - I don't want to risk the running of the site, and alternate URLs could do this.
In my opinion “Revived” has nothing to do with photography at all, sounds more like a version 2 of something is gone and there won't be reviews, videos or articles, so it is not a revival anyway.
I would suggest exploring other concepts instead of revived, maybe like DP.COM as in Digital Photography COMmunity.
My rationale for getting rid of "dp" is that DP is actually not a strong acronym for "digital photography"; it could be anything (like "dynamic programming", "DisplayPort", etc.). So a good name had better start with "photo" or "camera".
Both "DP" and "DPR" are for resonating with DPReview. In the long term we should get rid of "DP" and use "photo-" or "camera-".
After a while, one may figure out:
D -- for Digital. D P R spent a lot of space to Film. Defeats the D.
P -- for photography with again a lot of digital on videos? Can that be avoided? Should we embrace videos?
R -- for review. Maybe. One idea here would 'aggregation' of all the current reviews on the web. But not handling 'reviews' a la D P R.
May be the future name would describe the intent and the focus of the site: Community of 'photographers' and 'videographers' sharing views, ideas, opinions and asking questions or proposing solutions.
While harvesting the defunct D P R is a good start, we need this site to have a life of its own. And please: this is NOT a social media site!
Thanks for the hard working group responsible for the early success.
Film is still around, sure, but is anyone expecting digital to go away anytime soon?
I’ve said it before but I think this whole discussion is wrong headed, there’s nothing wrong with DPRevived as a name (quite the opposite, it describes what it is and it’s clearly resonating with people who are joining in droves).
To change the name now, while there are already a bunch of competing sites with names similar to those suggested and some confusion amongst DPR refugees would be nuts. To change the name in the future once the site is well established and everyone knows DPRevived as the new home of photography discussion (and news and reviews to come) would be equally crazy!
Google bots have been indexing this site from day one.
At any time in the future if the name or hostname / domain changes they will redirect all content with 301-redirects. All that you have to do is inform them via the GSC (Google Search Console).
Yes that's ok, I'd also thought of REV, though assumed it might conflict with what was once the most popular photo channel on YT : DigitalRev (a name I find impossible to forget I think due to the 'Rev').
On balance I do think it is better than Revived (which makes me think of zombies). Mainly because, I was at conference (making this up to illustrate the point) chatting to some guy, lots there, noisy :
'I need to ask a question about this new camera I've just got, which forum would you go to?'
'dpREV'
Now rerun that with some other names knocking around here, they just don’t work as well in that situation, kinda require 'just wait a mo' while I find a pen ...and tell me the name again?'
I asked the guy the next day if he’d sorted out his camera problem, he said, oh yep, dpREV, I’m a member now, thanks!
Rev is one syllable - always good, easily said, heard, remembered and typed. It's catchy. Revived isn't.
To those that say REV has nothing to do with photography, review doesn't either (or it does by context, like battery, strap or glass, etc). REV is also a spirit, revving up, it's up beat, a revolution; it's really ok.
I've said elsewhere, I stay open, considering all options on their merit for a while, without jumping to conclusions. In terms of a logo, I think we should be careful. Plus as a thumbnail can and should appear in the tabs of browsers it either should be compact or there should be a compact version of it - as part of accepting a design.
Being a graphic designer is part of my job, I've learnt several things along the way. Not to add unnecessary styles to titles, weird fonts, distracting spacing, rotated text - unless necessary - the spine of book etc. Don't add unnecessary colour. Don't add unnecessary graphics. Adding a big dot and saying it's a shutter button is pointless, it isn't, it's a big dot - and why see a big shutter anyway? Same for adding a rectangle or box-frame, and saying it's the shape of a sensor or VF etc. Be careful about it suddenly looking like 80's desktop publishing graphics just because 'it looks like a shutter button' etc.
Often best is to work with what's given (before and if adding more). DPRev, to me, initially gives dp (rather than DP). As I mentioned in a reply further above, the d and p are a symmetrically rotated version of the other (though not with all fonts), digital is photography and photography is digital. Good. This is so obvious it also demands to be used (in my eyes thinking graphically). Looking at DPREVIEW's logo they did the same, the logo is basically d and p (not that this should be copied but the chance of a lowercase d and p shouldn't be missed). I'd also use it for the name (sans logo). Hence I'd opt for dpREV.
If it is deemed better for a change to happen (-if it does) later than sooner, then we don't need to be thinking about all this right now, let the community bed-in first. Some say it should happen sooner for the inverse reasons, be the new you, now. I really don't know about the practical and otherwise reasons for sooner or later, all I am looking at is the clarity of a name and a logo.
Anyway, many thanks Bob, you're covering a lot of ground.
Thinking about this, personally if I was Amazon I’d be unhappy about “DPRev”. That sounds awfully like just a shortened version of DPReview, and could easily be a nickname for the current site (perhaps for some it already is). DPRevived has the advantage of being clearly a different word, not just a version of the same thing.
takes me back (not necessarily in a bad way) to my Olympus E-300. Otherwise called the Evolt, which at the time only a few knew the E stood for Evolution.
In early adverts was launched as an Evolution, the Evolution-300.
Anyway back to your suggestion, immediately I think it's too long. Long is ok it's really worthwhile, evolution isn't. Also the pick and mix font styles are a mess, based on minor ideas of relevance that are unnecessary in 'brand' name/logo (just being honest to not waste time). Sorry.
The shorter, simpler and easier to say (not being a tongue twister requiring slow speech), the better.
dpREV is still ok.
At the head of this thread I suggested dpFORUMS, this has now largely (-they added the r back in) been taken by the other site. Thinking back on this, 'Forums' can sound fusty, like libraries can be, or manilla folders, kinda boring. REV has verve, it's going places.
I'd go back to what I said just earlier, and make sure the logo was simple (maybe slick) and memorable.
Point A is whether we would ever want dpREV, or are we 100% on dpREVIVED, or something else. I like dpREV - even the look of it, it's already etched into my brain - and didn't take much storage space up!
Do we have any reason to suppose that Amazon will care?
If they've made no moves to either continue the site or sell it, it's hard to see how it would be in their interest to spend time and money protecting whatever IP resides in the name.
It’s still their IP, and they will have an army of lawyers dedicated to protecting all Amazon owned IP, bar none. The cost to them of rinsing this place through the courts is minimal after all - and who knows what someone might want to do with the brand ten, twenty, thirty years from now?
