How about the new Google Plus cover images?
-
I logged into several accounts this morning and have noticed Google Plus has changed their cover images/layout... again! When I edit the cover image, it only allows me to pick the old ratios.
What do you think?
Here to stay?
Was there an announcement or anything about this?
-
The problem with making it transparent is that you would lose 25% or so of the image which means you would still have to add some design to it (ie. making your picture offset or something) The way it is now you can just add a photo and you're done. No editing or Photoshop skills required. I just think it's too 'blocky' (thanks for the verification on that word) and think the 'info card' should be just a slightly bigger size or something to make it work better. You should be able to customize your background color for the 'text card' too. I think it would work better with branding.
https://plus.google.com/+LaBovick/ has their image fade at the bottom and the 'info card' to the left is a little longer and it looks nice that way. If Google could make this sort of design default I think it would look a lot better. Maybe even have the menu fit in that negative space below the image and to the right of the 'info card'.
Unfortunately I don't work at Google anymore so I'll just build a template to make it work. Either way it's much better then the old style.
-
Oh yah, and blocky is a word according to: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/blocky
-
The blurred background it just confusing. If it was transparent, and the info box showed the background image underneath instead of a duplicate, I think it would be better.
-
Did you also see that Google Places pages that are listed as having "Service Areas" can now be automatically upgraded to Google Plus pages? Its a slow roll-out, but we're seeing it done when we log into accounts! Sometimes we have to go in and delete the old G+ Business page to leave just the G+ Local page.
-
I'm enjoying the simplistic look of the new G+ page. The top image, where we were forced to scroll up to view it was just a horrible experience for all users. That scrolling really never served any purpose than to frustrate people with the "teaser" effect.
Now, it's all right there as it should be. Removing the thinking, confusion and frustrations and going back to what Google says they strive for, improving our experience using their products. In my opinion, this new page stylization has done that for me.
Patrick
-
Yeah maybe "love it" was an overstatement. I'm just so relieved that the annoying cover image is gone.
-
Nothing at Google is here to stay. I can think of at least 5 cover photo changes already. I didn't see any announcements but I now that the Google+ for Android rolled out yesterday.
Here are my thoughts
What I like about it:
- "that giant monstrosity of an image" that Mike Roberts mentioned is gone! I hated having to scroll UP to see all of it. That was just dumb.
- I like the 'info card' on the left side vs the bottom long drawn out text area we had before.
- I like that the 'info card' doesn't cover ANY of the image. We spend a lot of money on photography and I don't want it covered.
What I don't like:
- It looks very blocky (<-- is that a word?). I think a more artistic design would have been better. www.google.com/+vzpro is very boring whereas www.google.com/+labovick, who designed their cover before to allow for the text area to be easily read, looks great. I think making the 'info card' be a little longer and have a little shadowing behind it would make a world of difference as far as design. I know we can design images to do that now but I think it is an easy adjustment for G+ to do.
- I don't like the fact that the background of the 'info card' is the same image as the one to the right and is extremely blurred. I don't know if a solid color would be better but I just know I don't like it very much.
Ok, I'm off my soapbox now. Carry on...
-
Agreed! I'm sure this update will come as a big sigh of relief to many. The giant image was completely incongruous with the rest of the site and quite jarring.
There's a lot of empty space on pages, though - especially the profile page. Don't you think?
-
Can't say I love it but I otherwise agree with Jesse... that giant monstrosity of an image previously was just annoying.
-
I saw it, for some reason I always get overly excited about a Google plus update, couldn't find a mention of it, not sure if I like it yet.
-
Yeah I love it. So much better than the giant cover photo, that was driving me bonkers to be honest.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Google SERP shows wrong (and inappropriate) thumbnail for Facebook videos?
Hello I'm running into a strange issue with at least one of my client's video. The video is posted on Facebook. When searching for the video on Google, the SERP shows a completely wrong, and inappropriate, thumbnail image. (And in one case the preview video starts playing within Google SERP.) It also seems that Google is indexing various countries' facebook page for the same video separately (it-it.facebook.com, fr-fr.facebook.com, etc). Note that only the thumbnail and preview video within Google are wrong; if you click on the link, you see the correct video and page. I hesitate to divulge the actual client video, but there are some reports on Google's search community about the same behavior: Here's one that stargs back in March: https://support.google.com/webmasters/thread/33760205?hl=en and a more recent one: https://support.google.com/websearch/thread/71452151?hl=en It looks increasingly like a bug in some google algorithm, but nobody at google seems to acknowledge that. I've unpublished the original video from FB and submitted an 'outdated content' removal to Google, which is pending. In the meantime, my questions for our group of experts here: Has anyone else experienced this and any other suggestionso n how to fix? If we assume that this is not a google bug: how could a malicious actor or black-hat SEO influence Google's algorithms to cause this? Thanks, mickey
Social Media | | infamia0 -
Google+ and youTube
Hi everyone, Question regarding Google+ and youTube - 2 things I'm not massively au fait with these days. We have a number of branches all of whom have a Google+ account (with GoogleMyBusiness).
Social Media | | LoonyToons
All of these branches will soon be setup with a Communications Manager login only (for GoogleMyBusiness) as we need to restrict them from changing branch details. The powers that be in my company, have decided that we need to have 2 youtube channels for each branch.
One for news and the other for advertising properties. Having researched this, we understand that if we setup a new youTube channel, that will create another Google+ page - which we don't want, and could cause no end of trouble with duplicate Google+ pages. We are obviously going to try and persuade management to use only one youTube channel per branch, but in the event of being overridden does anyone have any advice on how to achieve 1 Google+ page with 2 youTube channels?1 -
Google Plus Company Page Verification
Hi How do you test successful G+ company page/publisher integration/verification if using the less technical methods such as linking between the Home page and the G+ company page instead of adding code to the head section? Since i take it the google structured data testing tool cant work in these cases since no code on the head section ! Is it best to add the code anyway ? I note my clients still not achieving a knowledge graph card/section in the search results for a branded search but i have heard that doesnt come until you have at least hundreds of followers and/or G+ interactions. All Best
Social Media | | Dan-Lawrence
Dan0 -
Do you think that Content Locking (force to share to unlock content) is manipulative and will eventually be penalised by Google?
There is a tactic called content locking which requires a user to share a post or homepage URL in order to unlock content (either a video, a full post or downloadable ebook). Do you think this is manipulating signals to increase search rankings? Argument Against Using Content Locking Social signals and links from Google Plus shares clearly correlate to increased search engine visibility. Requiring a user to pay for content with social sharing is only used to improve search rankings. According to the webmaster guidelines: "Avoid tricks intended to improve search engine rankings. A good rule of thumb is whether you'd feel comfortable explaining what you've done to a website that competes with you, or to a Google employee. Another useful test is to ask, 'Does this help my users? Would I do this if search engines didn't exist?'" Argument For Using Content Locker Users tend to value their social profiles and won't share something unless they believe it is valuable. Requiring a share is just a push to motivate them to share something they value. Additionally, it is similar to an email opt-in in that the publisher now has a social media lead they can follow up on. It's not just about SEO, it's about tapping into social network traffic and engagement on social networks.
Social Media | | designquotes1 -
I want to upload one of my youtube videos to my Google+ Account.
I want to include videos from my youtube channel on Google+. Does this mean I have to save the video file on my PC at first and then upload it?
Social Media | | knielsen0 -
Whats more beneficial - Google+1 on your website or Your Google+ Page
Hi From an SEO perspective what is the most beneficial getting +1 of your homepage or trying to get customers to click on your actual Google+ Page - or are they linked in some way? As the importance that Google are/will place on this cannot be ignored My concerns regarding Google+ are that I believe in the UK at least, most active consumers are not on Google+ (not sure what its like in the USA) many may not even have a google account, especially of their email is with the likes of hotmail or aol. The people who are using Google+ are other companies, web pros,marketing pros etc and not your target audience in many cases
Social Media | | ocelot0 -
Google + 1
1. does anyone know if these have a huge seo impact and if it is worth the effort to get these. 2. if you had to choose only one to focus on would you pick fb, twitter, or +1.
Social Media | | shiftins0 -
Twitter profile: Personal photo vs brand graphic image
We are promoting our company on twitter, and currently using a high quality brand graphic image. We see others who use the personal photo of "evangalist" who manages the twitter account. Any advice on what works best here to encourage user engagement? A more generic "brand" identity graphic versus a real person's photo? Of course this is in conjunction with doing all of the other good Twitter things, but curious what folks recommend on the profile image.
Social Media | | sftravel0