Page 2 of 3
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:52 pm
by Adamo
ultravioletzone.com
spectacular.net
nitrogen.com
molecularimages.com
starburstgalaxy.com
I also advice you to use names with "hypernova, supergiant, constallation, explosion, astro..., xray, gravity, spectrum, starpost, fusion, magnetic, molecular, etc".
Souns cool and a guy before entering this site would think "wow, that site must be really cool!"
or simply
lordchaos.com
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:56 pm
by Adamo
oh, ok. ultravioletzone.com is avaliable
galaxyevolution.com -easy to spell and easy to remember
astrostellar.com
binaryelements.com
gravityzone.net
magneticzone.net
molecularzone.com
all of the above are avaliable yet.
As you can see, a lot of names "........zone.com" are avaliable so far
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:05 pm
by Gambit37
These names are cool, but I'm afraid they suggest a connection with stars or astronomy or science which isn't what I want to do. The name either needs to be completely specific about what I do (matthewebdesign.com) for example, or completely abstract (pocketsoup.com)
To give you an idea of the names that work well, here are some used by big names in the industry:
snook.ca (the persons surname, short, catchy)
zeldman.com (the persons surname, short, catchy)
stopdesign.com (a play on words -- a web design agency)
mezzoblue.com
meyerweb.com
molly.com
veen.com
37signals.com
etc... you get the idea -- these are short and catchy. Using your own name is obvious and where the name is made up, it's almost always a fairly mysterious combination that doesn't really mean anything. Using possibly real phrases like molecularimages suggest I produced images of molecules.
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:20 pm
by Adamo
hey gambit, read my updated post above- a lot of names with "...........zone.com" on the end are yet avaliable! and a zone part is easy to spell, easy to remember and easy to join with almost any other word!
99.9% of "blahblah.com" names are registered, but 99% of "blahblahZONE.com" names aren`t!
ZONE isn`t bad, it suggests that it`s your part of the net for the work (zone).
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:24 pm
by Adamo
BTW, astrostellar.com isn`t bad, it may have something with a designing... like your design constellation or so .. so far I think it`s the best one. Easy to spell, everyone should remember THAT. And moreover, it`s ".com"!
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:28 pm
by Adamo
how about professionalzone.net ? avaliable
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:29 pm
by Gambit37
Thanks for all the help but I don't like "zone" I'm afraid.
binaryelement isn't bad, though it doesn't flow when spoken. For it to work, the second part needs to be short, eg, binarybox, binarydog, binarybap, etc...
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:33 pm
by Zyx
Gambit37 wrote:The name either needs to be completely specific about what I do (matthewebdesign.com) for example, or completely abstract (pocketsoup.com)
Then take the best of both worlds:
soupdesign.com
pocketgambit.com
37soups.com
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:34 pm
by Adamo
matthewweb.net -avaliable
ok, it has double w, doesn`t sound good
mattheweb.com -avaliable
well, this one is better to remember, but has one w only (bad spelling)
****
hey Zyx, only soupdesign.net is avaliable, soupdesign.com is already registered
but pocketgambit.com is still avaliable!!
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:08 pm
by Gambit37
I tried some other things, some of which didn't even adhere to my own rules and came up with the following, all of which are available to register:
scanswitch
sceneswitch
friskdesign
toomuchdesign
redbushdesign
greenparkdesign
skyswiftdesign
swiftskydesign
brightskydesign
lumitonic
decoysunlight
I think it will actually be useful to have the word design in the domain, despite my earlier comments. The ones I'm most keen on are "friskdesign" and "brightskydesign". Lumitonic sounds interetsing too...
I am very close to registering one of them -- any opinions on these?
Of course, at the end of the day, it's pretty subjective. What I think sounds good clearly does not match what the rest of you think
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:54 pm
by Zyx
friskdesign sounds good and is easily memorized and typed
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:18 pm
by Adamo
I definitely opt for friskdesign - it contains of 2 parts, brightskydesign of 3..
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:18 pm
by Gambit37
Yes, this is the one I am erring towards. I like it as it sounds "fast and fresh" and could be seen as a little bit fun or a little bit naughty depending on your point of view...
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:37 pm
by Gambit37
I have registered friskdesign.com and friskdesign.co.uk before I change my mind!
Now, to finally purchase some decent hosting. I'm going with mediaTemple in the US.
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:42 pm
by beowuuf
Oh, ok, i was goign to say brightskydesign sounded cool and lumitonic was also a nie one.
The only thing I came up with walking home was glossymountain, as it was a switch to matt hill...shame I was too late!
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:47 pm
by Gambit37
Oooh, I like glossymountain!
Oh bum...
Here's a potential Frisk logo:
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:23 pm
by Sophia
"Frisk design: where the 70s never ended"
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:53 pm
by Gambit37
Cute, ain't it? Retro is so in right now.... am I right to assume you don't like it?
Well, it's too late now, I like it, I registered it and I'm going with it. Watch this space.
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:18 pm
by beowuuf
Yeha, it is retro, luckily austin powers has slightly faded from memory, enought that to me it seems cool enough
Oh well, good luck!
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:31 pm
by Gambit37
Anyway, I'm only experimenting, that's not necessarily the logo I'll be using...
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:39 pm
by linflas
first, i thought i was reading "Irish design".. font is nice but maybe not so neat/tidy.
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:11 pm
by Sophia
Gambit37 wrote:am I right to assume you don't like it?
Well, it's too late now, I like it, I registered it and I'm going with it. Watch this space.
No, no, your name is your choice, it doesn't affect me and so it's not like I have any feelings about it one way or the other.
I agree with linflas about the logo, though, for what it's worth. I'm not totally sure if retro is the image you want, but again, your choice.
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:49 pm
by Gambit37
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:40 am
by beowuuf
Although the normal words, or the effects, work in some cases, I just don't like them - the seem boring. So for example 8 good 6 bad.
I liek the green one, but the words don't seem to fit in with the background shape - the words need curved to fit it, or actualyl i would alter the background shape, it doens't seem quite right for some reason!
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:12 am
by Gambit37
Yeah, I was just trying something with elements "off kilter", but I think you're right, it doesn't really work in this case.
Anyway, it's all an experiment, I'm not sure yet the kind of feel I want from the site so this is just one idea.
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:38 pm
by Gambit37
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:28 pm
by beowuuf
Not sure about any of the pages - the look very corporate just now
I liek your text except the last two sentences. The firts sentences are sharp and too the point and sound professional.
The last two sentences sound a little too chatty unless you had a different style for your website, i think
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 8:14 pm
by Gambit37
All copy is subject to change -- just filler text for now.
I don't wanna go overboard on the design. I always just wanted something clean and simple. I don't think these look corporate at all. Boxy and straight maybe, but not corporate. This is corporate:
www.hsbc.co.uk
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:17 pm
by Gambit37
Some variations. I've removed the colour completely so you don't get hung up on it -- comments on the design please. #10 is a more complete version showing a possible homepage treatment.
http://resonantedge.com/images/frisk_07.jpg
http://resonantedge.com/images/frisk_09.jpg
http://resonantedge.com/images/frisk_10.jpg
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:30 pm
by beowuuf
I like no 7 - I like the wide open on left explain on right layout
