Best Strategy to display 8mg Images on Product Pages for Ecommerce
-
I have an ecommerce store that has a variety of images including some super high quality images that are 8 mg.
This style of image could be completed for hundreds of products in the store.
Does anyone have any tips on what I should be watching out for here? Is 8 mg too unusable?
-
Hey Search Guys - it's been a while since you posted your question. Did you get the answers you needed or can you give us further clarification of what you're still needing help with?
If you did get the answers you needed, could you mark as "Good Answer" whichever answers you found most helpful and mark the overall question as answered? This will help other users who may come across the question in the future.
Thanks!
Paul
-
I guess my first question would be - why on earth would you want to use 8 megabyte images for web display? Even a full-screen image on the largest monitors (2560x1600 pixels) would only require a 600 or 700 kb image. Any bigger file and the user is going to be wasting time and bandwidth downloading and having to scroll around a massively oversize image. (And don't believe anyone who says the bigger file will be more detailed - simply not true.)
Given that page speed is absolutely critical on ecommerce sites, 15 or 20 second load time or even longer will be the kiss of death to conversion.
The only reason I can imagine wanting such a huge image is if you want the user to be able to zoom in on specific product details. If that's the case, you're MUCH better off using normal size images along with some cropped closeups of the detail areas needed.
Bottom line - 8mb images are utterly pointless on the web (unless you want the user to be able to download and print them - in which case they should be set up as a separate download-only link). Even Adobe Photoshop will give you a "not recommended" warning when trying to save files that size for web.
Paul
-
Hi Keri,
that is a fantastic idea for somebody that needs to give that type of an image however I would personally do what Keri said use dropbox, box or my personal favorite share file then the person will be able to download the link of the photo without any issue
However if you're going run this on a website you could seriously slow down your website and that's no good for anyone so make it a download if it is something important like a file that needs to be used or use Flickr they allow you to upload full sized images and I believe optimize them because they're never at-large for new download them.
If you're using WordPress you can check out Zippykid.com go to the help menu type in optimize photo and there is a great plug-in available.
I believe you said exactly what I should have finished with another trick that works for me and misses on a Mac using grabber so please forgive me if I'm giving you advice about something that does not apply to your computer. But use grabber from the utilities folder set it to png then take a grab or snapshot of the offending photo many times this will drop the size down to under a mg. However be warned if you want to have 300 megapixel images for retina displays on iPad 3 you can still add pixels to the copied version and save a boatload of space. But to the best of my knowledge PNG-8 is how you want to compress large photographs ( really all that are going on the web) that way it will be a lossless image meaning you will build little difference and no one else will except for the user downloading your site's content.
Keri Please correct me if I say anything that you feel is sending this person the wrong direction but to answer their question is 8mb too big my answer is most definitely yes for websites I cannot imagine a reason why you would need to have an image that large when compression technology has come so far for instance I use ImageOptim.app on a Mac however there are literally hundreds of outstanding tools to compress images on the web. Just go to a safe place to download them if using a Mac I recommend Mac updates if using a PC I recommend CNET each are safe places you can actually download free tools to help you with this issue from.
Sincerely,
Thomas
-
Is using a smaller image in the description with a link to (and warning about) the higher-resolution image a possibility? That way you're not loading a huge image on every page load, but it's still there for users who want more information.
-
Yes 8mb photos are very large use a photo compression app like http://freenuts.com/6-free-online-image-compressors/ and a I would use either rack space file cloud http://www.rackspace.com/cloud/public/files/screenshots/ using Akamai's content delivery network (CDN). http://aws.amazon.com/s3/ which in itself is not a CDN but as far as uploading large quantities of photos and downloading them for to a website it is a extremely powerful tool
or use Amazon S3 in combination with http://aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/ cloud front you will get the best of both worlds.
To make it simple on you and quick I would sign up for rack spaces cloud files and activate the Akamai CDN you do not have to pay and less you download the file. Making it better for you if you compress your photographs.
Last but not least an extremely inexpensive CDN is CDN77.com or MaxCDN.com you can get a terabyte of space for $35 on each however CDN 77 has more pops and offers more believe it or not for the money
8 megs is to a large especially if you're going to use more than one photo
I hope I've been of help to you,
Thomas
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
-
Is it best to 301 redirect or use canonical Url when consolidating two pages?
I have build several pages (A and B) with high quantity content. Page A is aged and gets lots of organic traffic, ranks for lots of valuable keywords, and has only internal links to this page. Page B is newer (6 months) and gets little traffic, ranks for no keywords, but has terrific content and many high value external links. As Page A and B are related to a similar theme, I was going to merge content from page B onto page A, but don't know which would be the best approach for handling the links going to page B. For the purposes of keep as much link equity as possible, is it best to us a 301 redirect from B to A or use a canonical URL from B to A?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Cutopia0 -
Url structure on product pages - Should we apply canonicalized links in breadcrumbs or entry folders
We have products in the that go into mulitiple categories on our e-commerce site. But of course, each product is only canonicalized to one category. My question is: what should the breadcrumbs look like when users access a product from a non-canonicalized/primary category ?Should we apply canonicalized links in breadcrumbs or entry folders? For example: Let´s say we have product called "glacier hiking in the alps". It is in two categories; 1) glacier hiking 2) mountain tours. And is canonicalized to the glacier hiking category. If a user accesses it from the mountain tours category, should the url/breadcrumbs look like this: www.example.com/glacier-hiking/glacier-hiking-in-the-alps (because that is the canonicalized version) Or should it look like like this: www.example.com/mountain-tours/glacier-hiking-in-the-alps (because that is where the user came from) Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | guidetoiceland0 -
Keyword stuffing on category pages - eCommerce site
Hi there fellow Mozzers. I work for a wine company, and I have a theory that some of our category pages are not ranking as well as they could, due to keyword stuffing. The best example is our Champagne category page, which we are trying to rank for the keyword Champagne, currently rank 6ish. However, when I load the page into Moz, it tells me that I might be stuffing, which I am not, BUT my products might be giving both Moz and Google this impression as well. Our product names for any given Champagne is "Champagne - {name}" and the producer is "Champagne {producer name}. Now, on the category pages we have a list of Champagnes, actually 44 Which means that with the way we display them, with both name of the wine, the name of the producer AND the district. That means we have 132 mentions of the word "Champagne" + the content text that I have written. I am wondering, how good is Google at identifying that this is in fact not stuffing, but rather functionality that makes for this high density of the keyword? Is there anything I can do? I mean, we can change it so it's not listed with Champagne on all the products, but I believe it would make the usability suffer a bit, not a lot - but it's a question of balance and I would like to hear if anyone has encountered a similar problem, if it is in fact a problem?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nikolaj-Landrock2 -
How best to deindex tens of thousands of pages?
Hi there, We run a quotes based site and so have hundreds of thousands of pages. We released a batch of pages (around 2500) and they ranked really well. Encouraged by this we released the remaining ~300,000 pages in just a couple of days. These have been indexed but are not ranking any where. We presume this is because we released too much too quickly. So we want to roll back what we've done and release them in smaller batches. So I wondered if: 1. Can we de-index thousands of pages, and if so what's the best way of doing this? 2. Can we then re-index these pages but over a much greater time period without changing the pages at all - or would we need to change the pages/the URL's etc? thanks! Steve
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SteveW19870 -
Best practice to consolidating authority of several SKU pages to one destination
I am looking for input on best practices to the following solution Scenario: I have basic product A (e.g. Yamaha Keyboard Blast) There are 3 SKUs to the product A that deserve their own page content (e.g. Yamaha Keyboard Blast 350, Yamaha Keyboard Blast 450, Yamaha Keyboard Blast 550) Objective: - I want to consolidate the authority of potential links to the 3 SKUs pages into one destination/URL Possible Solutions I can think of: - Query parameters (e.g /yamaha-keyboard-blast?SKU=550) - and tell Google to ignore SKU query parameters when indexing Canonical tag (set the canonical tag of the SKU pages all to one destination URL) Hash tag (e.g. /yamaha-keyboard-blast#SKU=550); load SKU dependent content through javascript; Google only sees the URLs without hashtag Am I missing solutions? Which solutions makes the most sense and will allow me to consolidate authority? Thank you for your input.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | french_soc0 -
De-indexing product "quick view" pages
Hi there, The e-commerce website I am working on seems to index all of the "quick view" pages (which normally occur as iframes on the category page) as their own unique pages, creating thousands of duplicate pages / overly-dynamic URLs. Each indexed "quick view" page has the following URL structure: www.mydomain.com/catalog/includes/inc_productquickview.jsp?prodId=89514&catgId=cat140142&KeepThis=true&TB_iframe=true&height=475&width=700 where the only thing that changes is the product ID and category number. Would using "disallow" in Robots.txt be the best way to de-indexing all of these URLs? If so, could someone help me identify how to best structure this disallow statement? Would it be: Disallow: /catalog/includes/inc_productquickview.jsp?prodID=* Thanks for your help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FPD_NYC0 -
Is there any delay between crawling a page by google and displaying of the ratings in rich snippet of the results in google?
Is there any delay between crawling a page by google and displaying of the ratings in rich snippet of the results in google?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NEWCRAFT0 -
SEOMoz mistaking image pages as duplicate content
I'm getting duplicate content errors, but it's for pages with high-res images on them. Each page has a different, high-res image on it. But SEOMoz keeps telling me it's duplicate content, even though the images are different (and named different). Is this something I can ignore or will Google see it the same way too?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JHT0