Moving from http to https: image duplicate issue?
-
Hello everyone,
We have recently moved our entire website virtualsheetmusic.com from http:// to https:// and now we are facing a question about images.
Here is the deal: All webpages URLs are properly redirected to their corresponding https if they are called from former http links. Whereas, due to compatibility issues, all images URLs can be called either via http or https, so that any of the following URLs work without any redirect:
http://www.virtualsheetmusic.com/images/icons/ResponsiveLogo.png
https://www.virtualsheetmusic.com/images/icons/ResponsiveLogo.png
Please note though that all internal links are relative and not absolute.
So, my question is: Can that be a problem from the SEO stand point? In particular: We have thousands of images indexed on Google, mostly images related to our digital sheet music preview image files, and many of them are ranking pretty well in the image pack search results. Could this change be detrimental in some way? Or doesn't make any difference in the eyes of Google? As I wrote above, all internal links are relative, so an image tag like this one:
Hasn't changed at all, it is just loaded in a https context.
I'll wait for your thoughts on this. Thank you in advance!
-
No problem
-
Great! Glad to know that. Thank you Dimitrii, I appreciated your help very much!
-
Oh, I see. Yeah, there shouldn't be any problems, if someone else links to your images with http. And yes, your assumption is correct
-
Thank you Dimitrii to clarifying, actually all our webpages now load images only via the https://, but since many external websites are hard-linking to many of our images via the regular http:// protocol, I was thinking to allow linking to them the "insecure" way if requested. Do you see my point? So... to better clarify my initial question, let's say Google is spidering one of those external affiliates and finds an image tag like this:
Will Google consider the image found at:
http://www.virtualsheetmusic.com/image.jpg
a duplicate of:
https://www.virtualsheetmusic.com/image.jpg
?? This was my original question...
In any case, I have made some testings today, and I have been able to redirect all images via .htaccess permanently (301) to https:// and looks like even if an image is requested with the http:// from the browser, it shows up correctly because the web browser handles redirects for images in the same way it handles them for the web page itself.
So... my concern should be solved this way. But in case, for any reason, I need to be able to serve the same image from both protocols (http or https) it is my understand that that shouldn't be an issue anyway. Is my assumption correct?
Thanks again.
-
I did quick search, and there are lots of good articles about why images are not duplicate content: http://bfy.tw/9Qy4
-
So, the reason I recommend having images loading only through one resource is the "insecurity" of https connection, if any resources are loaded not over https. You might have seen that sometimes instead of green lock in a browser bar, it can show yellow exclamation mark - that's one of the reasons. And also it's just cleaner, if everything is loaded the same way.
Here is a link to resource about mixed content: https://developers.google.com/web/fundamentals/security/prevent-mixed-content/fixing-mixed-content
-
Thank you Dimitrii for your reply.
Well, your two statements above contradicts each other, in my opinion. You see, what really concerns me is your last suggestion:
"it's better to make sure that images (and all the other resources) available only through one protocol - http or https."
And hence my original concern. Why should we make sure that images are available only through one protocol if you say first that there isn't such thing as duplicate content for images? Why should we concern about that then?
Sorry for my further request for clarification. I really appreciated your help!
-
Howdy.
As far as I understand, there is no such thing as duplicate content just for images. Duplicate content is more for the page as a whole. Especially, since you guys redirected all the links, you shouldn't have any problems, since google will simply "realize" the change.
Now, it's better to make sure that images (and all the other resources) available only through one protocol - http or https.
Hope this helps
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
-
Canonical Issue On AMP
Hi everyone,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MuhammadQasimAttari
I have one issue about canonical. kindly guide me about it. I have a site example.com/abc and I convert it on an amp and know its URLs is example.com/abc=?amp. but the search console tells me to add the proper canonical URL but both pages are the same. kindly guide me about it. what will I do?0 -
Main menu duplication
I am working on a site that has just gone through a migration to Shopify at the very same time as Google did an update in October. So problems from day 1. All main menu categories have subsequently over the past 6 weeks fallen off a cliff. All aspects of the site have been reviewed in terms of technical, link profile and on-page, with the site in better shape than several ranking competitors. One issue that i'd like some feedback on is the main menu which has 4 iterations in the source. desktop desktop (sticky) mobile mobile (sticky - appears as a second desktop sticky but I assume for mobile) These items that are "duplicated" menus are the top level menu items only. The rest of the nested menu items are included within the last mobile menu option. So desktop menu in source doesn't include any of the sub-menu items, the mobile version carries all these there are 4 versions of the top level main menu items in source Should I be concerned? Considering we have significant issues should this be cleaned up?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MickEdwards0 -
The images on site are not found/indexed, it's been recommended we change their presentation to Google Bot - could this create a cloaking issue?
Hi We have an issue with images on our site not being found or indexed by Google. We have an image sitemap but the images are served on the Sitecore powered site within <divs>which Google can't read. The developers have suggested the below solution:</divs> Googlebot class="header-banner__image" _src="/~/media/images/accommodation/arctic-canada/arctic-safari-camp/arctic-cafari-camp-david-briggs.ashx"/>_Non Googlebot <noscript class="noscript-image"><br /></span></em><em><span><div role="img"<br /></span></em><em><span>aria-label="Arctic Safari Camp, Arctic Canada"<br /></span></em><em><span>title="Arctic Safari Camp, Arctic Canada"<br /></span></em><em><span>class="header-banner__image"<br /></span></em><em><span>style="background-image: url('/~/media/images/accommodation/arctic-canada/arctic-safari-camp/arctic-cafari-camp-david-briggs.ashx?mw=1024&hash=D65B0DE9B311166B0FB767201DAADA9A4ADA4AC4');"></div><br /></span></em><em><span></noscript> aria-label="Arctic Safari Camp, Arctic Canada" title="Arctic Safari Camp, Arctic Canada" class="header-banner__image image" data-src="/~/media/images/accommodation/arctic-canada/arctic-safari-camp/arctic-cafari-camp-david-briggs.ashx" data-max-width="1919" data-viewport="0.80" data-aspect="1.78" data-aspect-target="1.00" > Is this something that could be flagged as potential cloaking though, as we are effectively then showing code looking just for the user agent Googlebot?The devs have said that via their contacts Google has advised them that the original way we set up the site is the most efficient and considered way for the end user. However they have acknowledged the Googlebot software is not sophisticated enough to recognise this. Is the above solution the most suitable?Many thanksKate
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KateWaite0 -
Is there a way to no index no follow sections on a page to avoid duplicative text issues?
I'm working on an event-related site where every blog post starts with an introductory header about the event and then a Call To Action at the end which gives info about the Registration Deadline. I'm wondering if there is something we can and should do to avoid duplicative content penalties. Should these go in a widget or is there some way to No Index, No Follow a section of text? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Spiral_Marketing0 -
Referring domain issues
Our website (blahblah).org has 32 other domains pointing to it all from the same I.P address. These domains including the one in question, were all purchased by the website owner, who has inadvertently created duplicate content and on most of these domains. Some of these referring domains have 301's, some don't - but it appears they have all been de-indexed by Google. I'm somewhat out of my depth here (most of what I've said above has come from an agency who said we should address this before being slapped by Google). However I need to explain to my line manage the actual issues in more detail and the repercussions - any anyone please offer advice please? I'm happy to use the agency, or another - but would like some second opinions if possible?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | LJHopkins0 -
Penguin Update Issues.. What would you recommend?
Hi, We've been pretty badly hit by this penguin Update. Site traffic is down 40-50%. We suspect it's for a couple of reasons 1)Google is saying we have duplicate content. e.g. for a given category we will have 4-5 pages of content (products). So it's saying pagenum=2 , pagenum=3 etc are duplicate pages. We've implemented rel=canonical so that pagenum=2 point to the original category e.g. http://mydomain/widgets.aspx We've even specified pagenum as a url parameter that pagniates. Google still hasn't picked up these changes. How long does it take - it's been about a week 2)They've saying we have soft 404 errors. e.g. we remove a category or product we point users to a category or page not found. is it best to block googlebot from crawling these page by specifying in robots.txt. because we really don't care about these categories or product pages. How best to handle? 3)There are some bad directory and crawlers that have crawled our website but have put incorrect links . So we've got like 1700 product not found. I'm sure that's taking up a lot of crawling time. So how do we tell Google not to bother with these link coming from specific sources e.g. ignore all links coming from xxx.com. Any help will be much appreciated as this is Killing our business. Jay
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ConservationM0 -
Canonical issue with my Home Page
Hi, My site has several canonical issues that should be fixed. http://www.crosscountryallied.com For my Home Page, more links are pointing at www.crosscountryallied.com/ (887) than http:// http://www.crosscountryallied.com/ctAlliedWebSite (27). It is recommended that I implement a 301 redirect to recapture a significant amount of link value. The following lists show the most common canonicalization errors that can be produced when using default settings on my web server: Microsoft Internet Information Services 6 (IIS): http://www.crosscountryallied.com/ http://www.crosscountryallied.com/default.jsp (or .jsp depending on the version) http://crosscountryallied.com/ http://crosscountryallied.com/default.jsp or any combination with different capitalization. Each of these URLs spreads out the value of backlinks to our homepage. Should I just redirect them to: http://www.crosscountryallied.com and add a canonical tag?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Melia0 -
How to Resolve Duplication of HTTPS & HTPP URLs?
Right now, I am working on eCommerce website. [Lamps Lighting and More] I can find out both URLs in website as follow. HTTP Version: http://www.lampslightingandmore.com/ HTTPS Version: https://www.lampslightingandmore.com/ I have check one of my competitor who has implemented following canonical on both pages. Please, view source code for both URLs. http://www.wayfair.com ** https://www.wayfair.com** Then, I checked similar thing in SEOmoz website. 🙂 Why should I not check in SEOmoz because, They are providing best SEO information so may be using best practice to deal with HTTPS & HTTP. LOL I tried to load following URL so it redirect to home page. https://www.seomoz.org is redirecting to http://www.seomoz.org But, following URL is not redirecting any where as well as not set canonical over there. https://www.seomoz.org/users/settings I can find out following code on http://www.seomoz.org/robots.txt **User-agent: *** ** Disallow: /api/user?*** So, I am quite confuse to solve issue. Which one is best 301 redirect or canonical tag? If any live example to see so that's good for me and make me more confident.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CommercePundit0