Google images
-
Hi,
I am working on a website with a large number (millions) of images. For the last five months Ihave been trying to get Google Images to crawl and index these images (example page: http://bit.ly/1ePQvyd). I believe I have followed best practice in the design of the page, naming of images etc. Whilst crawlng and indexing of the pages is going reasonably well with the standard crawler, the image bot has only crawled about half a million images and indexed only about 40,000.
Can anyone suggest what I could do to increase this number 100 fold?
Richard
-
Hi Richard,
I'm not a Google Images expert (otherwise I'd offer to help!) but you could check out the companies / individuals listed on Moz's <a>Recommended Providers page</a>. Many are agencies that prefer to work with people on longer retainers, but you may find someone to work with there, or the people listed may be able to point you to a trusted contact who specialises in images.
I haven't heard of people specifically specialising in image search but that doesn't mean those people don't exist, or that you won't find someone who has a lot of experience with image-heavy photography / art websites.
Cheers,
Jane
-
Hi,
Thanks for those who have offered advice so far.
I am looking an buy the services of an SEO expert with experience in getting vast numbers of images indexed by Google Images. If that is you or you know someone who could help, get in touch.
Richard
-
Thanks,
I think we could sharpen up the title and some other things.
However, we are doing reasonably well with indexing of pages - it's the images that seem to be so slow.
We do have image sitemaps (eg http://bit.ly/RDHmyo) but our experiments show that this is not much help.
This sitemap above was submitted about 14 days ago and has had about 2 million pages indexed but only 5,000 images indexed.
It feels like I have my foot on the hose pipe
Richard
-
Thanks for looking at this.
We are adding sitemaps "slowly" - ie 10 million at a time. eg: http://bit.ly/RDHmyo
This stemap was submitted about 14 days ago and has had about 2 million pages indexed but only 5,000 images indexed.
We will add another this week.
I think you may well be right about crawl budget. I have ensured that the bots are almost exclusively focused on these pages (well over 90% of crawls are of these pages). I am assuming that the only way t increase budget is to increase authority. Is that right?
-
I don't know about a 100-fold increase, but as Martijn said, an image sitemap will certainly help. You can often build images into the standard sitemap, but with so many images, you are best keeping these separate.
Something else I would look to do, is change the page Title structure. Currently, this says:
"The sky begins to lighten during morning twilight behind a suspension tower of the Leonard P. Zakim Bunker Hill Memorial Bridge. - DYFXET | Alamy"There is no mention here of photography, royalty free, stock images, etc.
I would be cutting the description of the image down so it looked something like this:
"The sky begins to lighten during morning twilight behind a suspension tower... Royalty free stock photography | Alamy"
Look at others who do well in stock image searches (Shutterstock, 123rf, etc.) and match some of what they do.
-Andy
-
Hi Richard,
Have you tried submitting image sitemap files to both Google Webmaster Tools as Bing Webmaster Tools. It's probably related to your crawl budget that Google is not crawling the millions of images on your site. That's why they maybe also can't found more than these pages.
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
-
SITEMAP - Does <changefreq>and <image:title>have any apreciable effect?</image:title></changefreq>
Hi everyone. It was hard to find some actual evidence that some of the atributes to be declared in a sitemap have some real impact.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Gaston Riera
Particularly, im interested in these two: <changefreq></changefreq> and**image:title</image:title>** I've used them in a few cases just to check their effect and couldnt see any.
Do you have any experience with these? Or any other atribute that might be helpful, in order to create a more accurate and effective sitemap? Also, this could be a great topic to create a new Moz Blog post, the one about sitemap is 8years old.0 -
Video SEO for Google
I was wondering what the prime factors were to make something rank for a video on Google. Does anyone have any suggestions? I think that length may be important, but I don't know what the ideal run time is. Hypothetically for local SEO, would I be better off doing a tag like "Mercedes Buffalo NY" or do individual tags of "Mercedes" and "Buffalo" Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | oomdomarketing0 -
Google Penalty - Has It Been Lifted?
Hi, We have been trying to remove a ‘partial’ google penalty for a new client by the way of removing unnatural backlinks over a period of time and then submitting a reconsideration request, and uploading a disavow file etc. Previously Google listed the partial penalty in the ‘manual actions’ section of webmaster tools, making it possible for us to submit a reconsideration request. Having just logged in however we get the message ‘no manual webspam actions found’. So there isn’t any way we can submit a reconsideration request. Does this mean that the penalty has been lifted? Or could it still exist? If the latter is there any other way to submit a reconsideration request? Many thanks in advance, Lee.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Webpresence0 -
Effect of I-Frame on Google Rank
My commercial real estate web site (www.nyc-officespace-leader.com) allows visitors to search for office space listings. The site sources listings through a third party and they are displayed in an i-frame. The i-frame directs visitors to listing pages such as: http://listings.nyc-officespace-leader.com/getspace.mpl?sp_id=A0173921&cust_id=offspldr Atleast 10,000 of these pages have backlinks to my site. My question is the following: Could these tens of thoudands of alpha numeric URLs be detrimental to my sites ranking on Google after the Panda/Penguin updates? SIte traffic dropped from 7,000 per month to about 3,300 after the April Google update. Rewriting content for dozens of pages and adding a blog have only somewhat mitigated the negative effects of Panda/Penguin. Could Google be viewing these links from the third party lisitng provider as a negative when they viewed these links as a plus before? Any downside to removing the third party links and parsing these listings from landlord websited and displaying them as part of my site with their own URL, title tag, description tag? Obviously the new URLS would not be alphanumeric. If these links have not caused the drop in traffic last April, what could be responsible? Thanks in advance for your opinion!!! Alan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
How does Google know if a backlink is good or not?
Hi, What does Google look at when assessing a backlink? How important is it to get a backlink from a website with relevant content? Ex: 1. Domain/Page Auth 80, website is not relevant. Does not use any of the words in your target term in any area of the website. 2. Domain/Page Auth 40, website is relevant. Uses the words in your target term multiple times across website. Which website example would benefit your SERP's more if you gained a backlink? (and if you can say, how much more would it benefit - low, medium, high).
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | activitysuper0 -
Google bot vs google mobile bot
Hi everyone 🙂 I seriously hope you can come up with an idea to a solution for the problem below, cause I am kinda stuck 😕 Situation: A client of mine has a webshop located on a hosted server. The shop is made in a closed CMS, meaning that I have very limited options for changing the code. Limited access to pagehead and can within the CMS only use JavaScript and HTML. The only place I have access to a server-side language is in the root where a Defualt.asp file redirects the visitor to a specific folder where the webshop is located. The webshop have 2 "languages"/store views. One for normal browsers and google-bot and one for mobile browsers and google-mobile-bot.In the default.asp (asp classic). I do a test for user agent and redirect the user to one domain or the mobile, sub-domain. All good right? unfortunately not. Now we arrive at the core of the problem. Since the mobile shop was added on a later date, Google already had most of the pages from the shop in it's index. and apparently uses them as entrance pages to crawl the site with the mobile bot. Hence it never sees the default.asp (or outright ignores it).. and this causes as you might have guessed a huge pile of "Dub-content" Normally you would just place some user-agent detection in the page head and either throw Google a 301 or a rel-canon. But since I only have access to JavaScript and html in the page head, this cannot be done. I'm kinda running out of options quickly, so if anyone has an idea as to how the BEEP! I get Google to index the right domains for the right devices, please feel free to comment. 🙂 Any and all ideas are more then welcome.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ReneReinholdt0 -
Have we suffered a Google penalty?
Hello, In January, we started a new blog to supplement our core ecommerce website. The URL of the website is www.footballshirtblog.co.uk and the idea behind it was that we would write articles related to our industry to build a community which would ultimately boost our sales. We would add several posts per day, a mix between shorter news stories of around 150 words and more detailed content pages of around 500 words. Everything was going well, we were making slow but sure progress on the main generic keywords but were receiving several thousand visitors a day, mostly finding the posts themselves on Google. The surge on traffic meant we needed to move server, which we did around 6 weeks ago. When we did this, we had a few teething problems with file permissions, etc, which meant we were tempoarily able to add new posts. As our developers were tied up with other issues, this continued for a 7-10 day period, with no new content being added. In this period, the site completely dropped from Google, losing all it's rankings and traffic, to the extent it now doesn't even rank for it's own name. This is very frustrating as we have put a huge amount of work and content into developing this site. We have added a few posts since, but not a huge amount as it is frustrating to do it with no return and the concern that the site has been banned forever. I cannot think of any logical reason why this penalty has occured as we haven't been link spamming, etc. Does anyone have any feedback or suggestions as to how we can get back on track? Regards,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ukss1984
David0 -
What To Do For A Website That is Mainly Images
I have a website that is a desktop wallpaper script. People can come and upload 100's of wallpapers to share with the community. This is were the problems comes in. Files are normally called 27636dark.jpg or whatever and come with no description. This leads to 2 things. no text content that google can use to know what the page/image is about. Meta descriptions, URL's just look like spam. Example: /car-wallpapers/7636dark.jpg If a text description was added, it would still only be like "Green Trees in the distance". Which as you may guess, with 1,000's of wallpapers... would end up having a lot of descriptions the same. Is there any advice for sites that focus on image driven content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rhysmaster0