"Photo" or "Photography" that is the question !

[Box Brownie]

Hi All

Finally (?) trying to resolve a name for my photographic web presence which I hope to use to sell prints off of online - using Photium - I have been tossing a mental coin and have a choice of 'basic' name - actually one I thought of months ago, the other one was more recent ~ without giving the names away both are available with either "namephoto" or "namephotography" both in .com and .co.uk

My angst now is as per the title which 'ending' should I plump for "photo" or "photography" bearing in mind I want to create a positive impression? And should I ever be fortunate enough for someone to commission anything as a result of what they see on the site.........?

Incidently, with the older idea because there are two phonic ways of spelling it I intend to buy both but the newer name is readable & pronouncable only one way ~ the latter name is shorter and more contemporary/edgy compared to the first one which has slightly more funky/fun 'feel' to it.

So though I am intentionally being vague as based on feedback it could be a few days before I buy 'them' and as shhhh! you never know who lurks on web fora......what is your view of the main question and your thoughts now I have outlined the 'name' aspect of the whole "name"???

TIA for any thoughts and feedback

[bieber]

I'm going to be registering a domain as lastnamephoto shortly, seems like the logical choice to me. On the web, if someone has to remember something and type it in, shorter is better.

[Box Brownie]

I'm going to be registering a domain as lastnamephoto shortly, seems like the logical choice to me. On the web, if someone has to remember something and type it in, shorter is better.

Fair comment re 'lastname' but sadly though I am proud of my name and its family history it is one that I am forever spelling out to folks & it is just 5 characters because it is often mis-spelt. :evil:

Re: 'photo' yes shorter can be better......??? hence my question :D

[dude wheres my canon]

lol I made a topic about this just now... you beat me to it

[tracknut]

Personally I give a lot of weight to a shorter domain name. It's easier to remember, and less likely to generate a typo. And unless your marketing plan has most of your sales based on internet searches, I doubt having "photography" in the domain name is accomplishing a whole lot. So I'll vote for photo, of your options.

Dave

[NickSimcheck]

I vote for namephoto.com

[Box Brownie]

Thanks guys for the feedback, it always helps to have others thoughts and I am starting to settle my mind on which/what to choose and also how it may be made up as a logo for the website, on business cards & even maybe embroidered onto a fleece or sweatshirt.

Based on all the 'this' I am leaning towards the "name"photo.com using the "name" I think is more comtemporary/edgy rather than the funky/fun one though they are 8 & 9 characters long respectively the 8 long one 'sounds' shorter as a spoken word, so to speak.

Hmmmm!!!!! start with a fresh piece of paper and see what each 'looks' like written down in isolation.

:)

[butcha27]

i think namephoto is definitely better for websites, much easier to remember, you can always have namephotography pointing to the same site as well so theres no mix ups?

[Box Brownie]

i think namephoto is definitely better for websites, much easier to remember, you can always have namephotography pointing to the same site as well so theres no mix ups?


Good point that had not escaped me, just adds nicely to the costs of the whole plan.

Any thoughts on the "name" choice - contemporary/edgy vs funky/fun ???

[lingham]

i like boxbrowniephoto.co.uk

tbh

[Box Brownie]

i like boxbrowniephoto.co.uk

tbh

:lol: yes I do too but as far as I am aware Kodak have not relinquished that TradeMark yet. Great as my 'nick' but to try it on as trading presence could lead to trouble I cannot afford!

[Mike-DT6]

I would suggest the shortened 'photo' version too. I would get both the .com and .co.uk versions whilst you are at it.

Mike

[scejas]

Short and simple ....

Less typing and easiest spelling...

[Box Brownie]

Thanks all for the feedback.

Just looking for any more thoughts about the choice of comtemporary/edgy rather or funky/fun as the 'name' part. Are both these days looked on as equally "professional" bearing in mind my intention as of now is purely photographs not fineart or phart though as remarked above I may try some of the painterly looks once in a while!

:)

[sandro9mm]

well, I work at night clubs so when I shoot people they ask me - 'where can we find our photos?' so imagine telling them lastname + photography considering most of them are drunk or drugged they won't remember a ****. So sandrophoto.com works just perfect :)

[Jimages]

You should always go for the most practical and memorable name. Don't worry about being cool, hip, funk and modern, because that lasts only so long as it's fashionable.

Common sense should always prevail.

[Box Brownie]

Hi James

Fair comment especially re "memorable". I take your point about fashionable and the two names I have in mind are IMO memorable just that, as per question, they each have different 'feel' to them.

Yes, I had thought and am still considering just using my initialsphoto as the 'name'. That would make it very short.

:)

[slappy sam]

I just used my full name as my site...

initials + photo would make a good domain name. cdphoto.com, thats tempting. Alas, I just looked and "chris davis" already took it :(

otherwise id say add "photography" on, more professional imo. But I can see the point for "photo".

[Scott-LYP]

With a name like Scott Wilson or my Wife Erin Wilson, we had to go with a studio name verses using our last name or some combination... Wilson is just too common. That is why we went with Leap Year Photography, plus we feel it is a memorable name. We ended up registering leapyearphoto.com and leapyearphotography.com We go by "Leap Year Photography" but when we tell people the web site is always leapyearphoto just because it is easier to type...

[Box Brownie]

I just used my full name as my site...

initials + photo would make a good domain name. cdphoto.com, thats tempting. Alas, I just looked and "chris davis" already took it :(

otherwise id say add "photography" on, more professional imo. But I can see the point for "photo".

With a name like Scott Wilson or my Wife Erin Wilson, we had to go with a studio name verses using our last name or some combination... Wilson is just too common. That is why we went with Leap Year Photography, plus we feel it is a memorable name. We ended up registering leapyearphoto.com and leapyearphotography.com We go by "Leap Year Photography" but when we tell people the web site is always leapyearphoto just because it is easier to type...

Thanks both for the feedback.

The rule of thumb as I see is that the name should be spellable only one way (NB In the case of one of the ideas I had there are two possible ways of spelling it so buying both would be needed) my surname is not common (last time I looked I think it is no more than a dozen in the UK and we are all related) and is the same as famous USA actor/comedian of I think the 50's but can be mis-spelt even though is only 5 letters long. Even my initials could read like a nickname so the matter does get a little complex.

So I am getting closer to the conclusion :confused:

[Uhland]

both... You dont have to use both but hold the others in reserve.
The cost is small and you could end up wishing you did if you start getting traffic.

[figmented]

by the way, domains cost less then 5$ per year most of the time, having a second domain point to your main is not a hinderance on your cost unless u are retarded.

[Mike R]

On my business name isMike Rubin Photography. I wanted a shorter web address so I use MikeRubinPhoto.com

[Box Brownie]

Hi All

I have now registered engramphoto and 'variants' and I will point all of them to the primary .com

This final decision is actually not one of the two I was mulling over but once I had considered 'its' meaning and potential to present it I went for it. :D

[MJPhotos24]

Personally I like photography better because for some reason it sounds more professional than photo. Mike Janes Photo makes me think of a photo of me, Mike Janes Photogarphy sounds more like a business.

[MJPhotos24]

by the way, domains cost less then 5$ per year most of the time, having a second domain point to your main is not a hinderance on your cost unless u are retarded.

I pay $140 for two domains ($120 for one domain and my storage/site/etc. and $20 for another domain name pointed to it). Not the cheapest I know but get a TON of features with that, when I went through godaddy.com and went through the order process and checked all there add ons it was just slightly cheaper than what I pay a month - but it wasn't 1/4th of the features I get. So it was an easy choice to spend more $$ and get what I wanted.

[Box Brownie]

Personally I like photography better because for some reason it sounds more professional than photo. Mike Janes Photo makes me think of a photo of me, Mike Janes Photogarphy sounds more like a business.

Yes, fair comment but my name has been mis-spelt oh so many times (both my first & last names !!!!) that I wanted to go with a "name". I have registered the engramphotography as well as the commonest misspelling ngram to cover all my bases.

I pay $140 for two domains ($120 for one domain and my storage/site/etc. and $20 for another domain name pointed to it). Not the cheapest I know but get a TON of features with that, when I went through godaddy.com and went through the order process and checked all there add ons it was just slightly cheaper than what I pay a month - but it wasn't 1/4th of the features I get. So it was an easy choice to spend more $$ and get what I wanted.

For various ventures I have registered a few domains and one thing I learned early on was cheap registering services make you pay in the end e.g. charge you to move a 'name'. Now I use simply.com and point/forward as needed and even where I have assigned the DNS tags I still have control. For the record the above names with variants has cost me £158 , so not cheap but I want to move this project forwards and see where it takes me 2008 :lol:. As for our fellow poster impuning folks' mental capacity I better not say just how high my IQ is ;)