PetaPixel

New Top Level Domains for Photographers, Grab Them While They Last

As was inevitable, the more common and generic top level domains (e.g. .com, .net, and even .co) are becoming scarce as more and more domains are registered each day.

Knowing this moment in time would come, ICANN, the authority in charge of managing domain names, has been putting out more and more top level domains in hopes of opening up more options for those looking to grab their own piece of the web — and photographers are benefiting more directly than most.

As of this month, ICANN has released six new domains that will specifically stand out for us shutter junkies:

  • .photography
  • .gallery
  • .graphics
  • .equipment
  • .camera
  • .lighting

It’s safe to say many of the obvious configurations of the above domains are taken, but being fresh in the world of domains, it’s also likely you’ll be able to snag one of the above that’s much more specific to your work than your .com or .net domain name.

For the first time since the late 80s, it’s likely you’ll be able to get your hands on a domain name that will really stand out in the crowd. That’s something that could make a big difference when it comes to branding.

Screen Shot 2014-02-19 at 12.47.06 PM

Not that these domains don’t come with pitfalls. In addition to being quite a bit longer than .com, it’s possible that those looking to find you online will attempt to add .com to the end of anyways, just out of habit. Over time, this issue will probably work itself out as people become accustomed to the new domains, but in the meantime there may be some struggle.

Ranging in price from $16/year to $35/year, the domains are available from the most widely used and trusted domain registrars, such as GoDaddy, Namecheap, and my personal favorite, Hover.

And since these domains are now, and people fear change, many of the registrars are offering discounts to help ease the pain if you’re planning to make the transition. GoDaddy is offering 32% off the newest top level domains, the above six being a part of the offer, for a limited time. And Hover is offering 10% off your entire purchase if you use the coupon code “HONEST.”

Whether you’ve already grabbed your own little piece of the web using the new domains or are planning to, let us know what you think about these new top level domains and how you believe they’ll affect the photo industry in the comments below.

(via Lensvid)


 
Get the hottest photo stories delivered to your inbox.
Get a daily digest of the latest headlines:
  • http://www.daniriot.com/ Dani Riot

    The biggest problem with these domains at the moment is if you fail to type in http:// or www. many internet browsers with think you are searching, not going to a website.

    So if you buy ‘fashion.photography’ most of your customers are just going to get the google search results for ‘Fashion Photography’… not your website.

    This may change though… but I don’t see google changing their algorithms for their searches.

  • Alex Minkin

    I precisely see google changing to adapt to a new standard, otherwise whats the point?

  • Zos Xavius

    the browsers just need to support the TLDs. it won’t take long for them to recognize it.

  • Zos Xavius

    fwiw, i just tried xxx.photography in chrome. it recognized it as a domain and tried to lookup the ip.

  • Alex Minkin

    My issue with this is while the cost isn’t terrible, it’s just one more thing I have to buy to prevent someone from hijacking my name relating to photography.

  • http://www.gannonburgett.com Gannon Burgett

    I can assure you the makers of browsers and search engines will adapt to the new protocols.

  • http://www.daniriot.com/ Dani Riot

    yeah, the browsers will change. but it won’t be a swift thing. Changing the way something works after it being one way for decades will throw up problems.

    .com .co.uk .org etc were all chosen because they were obvious as domain caps and wouldn’t be mixed up with words.

    Now choosing words, will always have a fail rate. Even if every search engine and browser amends.

    Like said above in the post, most people will still assume you need a .com on the link.

  • http://www.gannonburgett.com Gannon Burgett

    That’s definitely a concern for many. However, it’s something that will likely only help in the case of SEO ratings and the like.

  • http://www.gannonburgett.com Gannon Burgett

    Google (ergo Chrome as well) already have support for the new domains. I would assume Firefox and Safari are just around the corner.

    As I mentioned in the post above and you reiterated, the adding of .com on the end is inevitable, but we’ll adapt as we always do.

  • http://www.daniriot.com/ Dani Riot

    we will adapt, sure. As owners of websites we are always the first to adapt.

    But its the consumer that we want to visit our website, as they are the ones who hand over the cash. They will be the ones slow to adapt.

    Just look at how many people still had terrestrial TV’s on the day we switched to digital (UK thing… might not translate)

  • http://www.gannonburgett.com Gannon Burgett

    Consumers will certainly suffer, but we can help them through setting up redirects if needed, as well as a quick post explaining the changes (or linking to this article).

    It’s not fun and is a hassle, but it’s a fairly small tradeoff for keeping up with technology.

  • Joe Pepersack

    You’d be better off registering your name as a trademark/service mark with respect to photography. This will give you automatic precedence in any domain dispute with ICANN, as well as a lot of other benefits.

  • Ahmed

    I don’t think the discount link is working, because it shows me that the cost of *.photography & *.camera domain is C$ 43.99/yr each. whereas a *.gallery domain costs C$ 76.99/yr.

    Or does the discount applies only to U.S. residents?

  • Cao

    I would rather go to a .com photography website than one of these domains, even if I know that there’s no difference between the two. It’s hard, as a viewer, to get used with new tlds as such that it becomes routine

  • Tobias W.

    I don’t think Namecheap should be advertised. They are not cooperative in the fight against email spam and their practice of allowing a single customer to register dozens of new domain names on a daily basis while at the same time allowing Whoisguard protection on the ownership information only benefits the spammers. 99% of the spam that makes it through the filters on my mail server originates from mail servers registered through Namecheap. Their above described practice enables spammers. Please don’t support them by becoming a customer. Thanks.

  • WillG

    The only one I see being useful is the .photography address for photographers who have “Photography” in their brand name. For example, “Utah Bob Photography” would make a nice domain as Utahbob.photography

  • WhoPooted

    …I’ll wait for the .photo
    .photography is a bit much to type, especially since I have a rather short .com already. I may add the .photo when it’s available as security

  • Jimmy Fartpants

    Too late. I just bought WhoPooted.photo.

  • Matt

    I see that petapixel.photography is already taken… Hmm… :P

  • http://bigdatacrunching.blogspot.com/ suckerpunch

    wtf. all the interesting names are already gone. suckers.

  • http://www.gannonburgett.com Gannon Burgett

    Michael is on the ball ;)

  • WhoPooted

    LMAO… no, “WhoPooted” just didn’t draw the crowds I envisioned for my wedding photography. “WhoProjectileS**ttedOnMyLens” was cool for the newborn photos, though… I may look into that one.

  • Martin C. Walsh

    We’ve been testing them out for a few days now. Safari can get a little bent out of shape if you type into the search bar, but overall we’ve seen little problems and Google indexed them right up! I think these are going to look exceptional on a business card: http://westcoast.photography

  • kandy830

    My Uncle Harrison recently got Infiniti Q50 Sedan from only
    workin part time on a home computer… go to this website
    C­a­s­h­D­u­t­i­e­s­.­ℂ­o­m

  • http://joshhumble.com/ Josh Humble

    I think this is silly. Photographers and visual artists aren’t the only ones getting custom tld’s; they’re popping up everywhere, and it’s just more to remember and learn. Leave the identity and branding in the root domain. Usability suffers with this quite a bit, IMO.

  • Benoit Evans

    These new TLDs are TOO LONG. Since I’m in Canada, I have a .ca site and a 5-letter name. Some countries allow non-resident individuals and companies to have a country TLD.

    A short name with a two-letter country TLD beats any long TLD (although some country codes might be unappealing).

  • Scott M.

    Just got 3 new domain names. Thank you for the info!

  • Scott M.

    godaddy was $24 for .photography domain names I got three

  • Cynical Bloke

    You are a week too late Petapixel as usual. All the best ones are gone.

  • Zos Xavius

    OMG! CHANGE!

  • Banan Tarr

    Heh my name was never at risk for being taken as a .com, so I’m all good already :) I bet there are some clever ones out there though, like i.love.photography. brb checking…nope, DNS fail. Someone’s not on the ball here!

  • http://islandinthenet.com/ Khürt L. Williams

    I see the opposite problem. Users looking for “Fashion Photography” but instead being taken to a web site.

  • http://islandinthenet.com/ Khürt L. Williams

    princeton.photography is already gone. I wonder who that was? I got princetonarea.photography and skillman.photography

    khurtwilliams.photography is way too long and not useful to anyone but myself. So I left it.

  • Alex Minkin

    definitely agree, though i did jump on the bandwagon and get one anyways. it’s just redirecting to my .com site anyways

  • Daddy

    Godaddy link is missing. Mkay.

  • be art

    y’all mf will buy one :))

  • CrispCrisp

    The most obvious thing is still available: photo.gallery

  • Sky

    It’s just a classical example of “let’s get some more money” from ICANN. These domains never had anything to deal with usability. It’s pure money grab.

  • Sky

    ICANN thanks you for supporting their idea and new source of income.

  • delastro

    I think the new domains are only interesting for english markets. Not English people like their national domains or .com.

  • http://www.djchuang.com/ djchuang

    maybe the browser developers will add extra smarts in the address bar and handoff what’s typed in to the search engine when the URL version doesn’t have a responding server #hmmm

  • http://www.djchuang.com/ djchuang

    What’s great about this new Internet namespace expansion is precisely for the non-English people, because they will be able to get Internationalized Domain Names (IDN) in their own language and character set! These 4 are already live:

    شبكة (xn—ngbc5azd) – Arabic for “web/network”

    онлайн (xn—80asehdb) – Russian for “online”

    сайт (xn—80aswg) – Russian for “site”

    游戏(xn—unup4y) – Chinese for “game(s)”

  • http://islandinthenet.com/ Khürt L. Williams

    That still won’t solve the problem if I get a URL when I really wanted something else.

  • mark

    your code for hover doesn’t seem to work

  • http://scottwyden.com/ Scott Wyden Kivowitz

    I strongly recommend for photographers to not purchase these TLDs for their business. If for fun or for a project then sure, but not a main business website. I published my reasoning at http://www.photocrati.com/top-level-photography-domains/.