Is it important to include image files in your sitemap?
-
I run an ecommerce business that has over 4000 product pages which, as you can imagine, branches off into thousands of image files. Is it necessary to include those in my sitemap for faster indexing?
Thanks for you help!
-Reed
-
Thanks Gianluca, very helpful.
-
I'd add one condition:
we do really want our images to rank in Google Images? Maybe we don't want that, especially since Google Images is not anymore that great source of traffic it was before its layout changed (we can see photos directly inside Google without clicking the "see the page" link). If it is so, I would prioritizes the image sitemaps.
But if you want your images indexed, picked up (and hotlinked) by other site or directly stolen but with you being able to find who used them without credit, then the image sitemap is needed:
here an example directly by Google: http://www.google.com/schemas/sitemap-image/1.1/sitemap-image.xsd.
I don't know what CMS are you using, but if it WordPress, the WordPress SEO by Yoast plugin automatically generates the image sitemaps.
-
Yes, this will help Google when crawling them as it will give them additional info.
-Andy
-
Thanks Andy,
Would it be best to have all the img alt tags set up before adding site-map?
-
Hi,
It isn't necessary, but if you really want to ensure that every image is indexed by Google, then it will be beneficial to do this otherwise you might not have them all discovered simply by crawling.
-Andy
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
-
Facebook widget and blocked images
A Wordpress site has a footer widget for facebook with some images, all of which are served within an iframe. The FB CDN robots is blocking the images from being crawled so Webmaster Tools rendering tool is reporting these 8 or so images as blocked. Should I be concerned?
Technical SEO | | MickEdwards0 -
What is the optimum schema for a Website and how important is it really is for SEO?
Hey everyone,
Technical SEO | | artdivision
As you all probably has seen Google has changed their structure testing tool and alongside that has also changed what is considered as valid and not valid. I have been struggling with this question for quite a while now where opinions are really split. **1. How important is Schema for SEO? **
2. How far should you go Schema'ing your website pages? From the one hand i can see how it can be easier for a BOT to read a code that has proper "road signs" (our schemas markups), on the other hands, Google is already extremely clever is working out what is the header, sidebar or footer as well as review and or a blog posts (especially for those of us who use Wordpress. Would love to know if someone has seen a "Like to Like" show case with schemas and/or have some factual information regarding what should or shouldn't be done when it comes ot Schema. Dan. x1aw0 -
How can I stop google indexing an image
I have put a map of cornwall on my site on the Corwnall Page, and for some reason Google.de has picked it up and shows it up in the top 4 images for a search for cornwall? The result is I am getting about 80% of the traffic coming to my site for the search Cornwall (I get about 50 unique visits per day, over 40 a day are landing on the Cornwall page. Is this a problem for my normal SEO as a Close up Magician? Will google start to think my site is about Cornwall? Should I noindex the image (I say that like I know how! - How do I noindex that image? ) Or is any traffic to a site good traffic, I imagine they will be clicking on the link landing on the page and then leaving, which I suspect is not good for google reputation. Any thoughts anyone Thanks Roger http://www.rogerlapin.co.uk Where they land http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://www.rogerlapin.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/map-of-cornwall.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.rogerlapin.co.uk/magician-cornwall-magicians-hire-cornwall&h=904&w=1000&sz=167&tbnid=9GFlDv3BTz4ikM:&tbnh=99&tbnw=110&zoom=1&usg=__-b4bUYWREU_wAy2M04LrsrkzZpw=&docid=AUFmzso0arbGDM&sa=X&ei=HLZ2UpGYDMrY0QWXp4D4Dg&ved=0CEgQ9QEwAw&dur=2958
Technical SEO | | rnperki0 -
CSS Float Top Left Image not displaying
Using CSS/HTML in Dreamweaver CC, I am trying to display a SEO friendly matrix of six images wide by three deep on the Home Page, but cannot get the first (top left) image to display consistently. The page appears correctly in Dreamweaver Design View, but not in the Live View. Equally it works fine in Safari, but not in Firefox nor I.E. I seem to have tried every CSS variation to resolve this issue, without success. Can someone stear me in the right direction, please? The relevant HTML Code ... Celotex PL4050 - 62.5mm insulated wallboard from £11.96 per m² / £34.45 per board SuperFoil SF19 40mm Multi-foil Roll from £5.23 per m² / £98.00 per 18.75 m² Roll Celotex GA4000 General application Rigid PIR from £8.56 per m² / £24.66 per board Rockwool Full-fill 75mm Cavity Wall Slabs from £3.51 per m² / £1.92 per slab Knauf Earthwool 270mm Loft Roll 44 Combi-Cut from £3.80 per m² / £22.51 per 9.93 m² Roll Kingspan Kooltherm K8 75mm Cavity Wall Boards from £16.26 per m² / £8.79 per board Knauf Earthwool 170mm Combi-cut Loft Roll 44 from £3.16 per m² / £25.34 per 8 m² Roll Kingspan Kooltherm K7 Rigid Phenolic Foam - 75mm £13.91 per m² / £40.05 per board ... The associated CSS code ... #popular {
Technical SEO | | JustInsulation
width: 1050px;
height: 800px;
overflow: hidden;
width: auto;
height: auto;
}
#product1 {
background-image: url(../007-graphics/popular/01-prod.png);
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 150px;
height: 265px;
margin-left: 24px;
float: left;
overflow: auto;
clear: left;
}
#product2 {
background-image: url(../007-graphics/popular/02-prod.png);
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 150px;
height: 265px;
margin-left: 10px;
float: left;
opacity: 0.85;
}
#product3 {
background-image: url(../007-graphics/popular/03-prod.png);
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 150px;
height: 265px;
margin-left: 10px;
float: left;
max-height: 275px;
opacity: 0.85;
}
#product4 {
background-image: url(../007-graphics/popular/04-prod.png);
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 150px;
height: 265px;
margin-left: 10px;
float: left;
max-height: 275px;
}
#product5 {
background-image: url(../007-graphics/popular/05-prod.png);
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 150px;
height: 265px;
margin-left: 10px;
float: left;
max-height: 275px;
opacity: 0.85;
}
#product6 {
background-image: url(../007-graphics/popular/06-prod.png);
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 150px;
height: 265px;
margin-left: 10px;
float: left;
max-height: 275px;
opacity: 0.85;
}
#product7 {
clear: both;
background-image: url(../007-graphics/popular/07-prod.png);
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 150px;
height: 265px;
margin-left: 24px;
float: left;
max-height: 275px;
opacity: 0.85;
}
#product8 {
background-image: url(../007-graphics/popular/08-prod.png);
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 150px;
height: 265px;
margin-left: 10px;
float: left;
max-height: 275px;
}
#product9 {
background-image: url(../007-graphics/popular/09-prod.png);
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 150px;
height: 265px;
margin-left: 10px;
float: left;
max-height: 275px;
opacity: 0.85;
} ... The complete code is located at - www.just-insulation.com/index.html0 -
Do the search engines penalise you for images being WATERMARKED?
Our site contains a library of thousands of images which we are thinking of watermarking. Does anyone know if Google penalise sites for this or is it best practice in order to protect revenues? As watermarking these images makes them less shareable (but protects revenues) i was thinking Google might then penalise us - which might affect traffic Any ideas?
Technical SEO | | KevinDunne0 -
URL restructure and phasing out HTML sitemap
Hi SEOMozzies, Love the Q&A resource and already found lots of useful stuff too! I just started as an in-house SEO at a retailer and my first main challenge is to tidy up the complex URL structures and remove the ugly sub sitemap approach currently used. I already found a number of suggestions but it looks like I am dealing with a number of challenges that I need to resolve in a single release. So here is the current setup: The website is an ecommerce site (department store) with around 30k products. We are using multi select navigation (non Ajax). The main website uses a third party search engine to power the multi select navigation, that search engine has a very ugly URL structure. For example www.domain.tld/browse?location=1001/brand=100/color=575&size=1&various other params, or for multi select URL’s www.domain.tld/browse?location=1001/brand=100,104,506/color=575&size=1 &various other non used URL params. URL’s are easily up to 200 characters long and non-descriptive at all to our users. Many of these type of URL’s are indexed by search engines (we currently have 1.2 million of those URL’s indexed including session id’s and all other nasty URL params) Next to this the site is using a “sub site” that is sort of optimized for SEO, not 100% sure this is cloaking but it smells like it. It has a simplified navigation structure and better URL structure for products. Layout is similair to our main site but all complex HTMLelements like multi select, large top navigations menu's etc are all removed. Many of these links are indexed by search engines and rank higher than links from our main website. The URL structure is www.domain.tld/1/optimized-url .Currently 64.000 of these URL’s are indexed. We have links to this sub site in the footer of every page but a normal customer would never reach this site unless they come from organic search. Once a user lands on one of these pages we try to push him back to the main site as quickly as possible. My planned approach to improve this: 1.) Tidy up the URL structure in the main website (e.g. www.domain.tld/women/dresses and www.domain.tld/diesel-red-skirt-4563749. I plan to use Solution 2 as described in http://www.seomoz.org/blog/building-faceted-navigation-that-doesnt-suck to block multi select URL’s from being indexed and would like to use the URL param “location” as an indicator for search engines to ignore the link. A risk here is that all my currently indexed URL (1.2 million URL’s) will be blocked immediately after I put this live. I cannot redirect those URL’s to the optimized URL’s as the old URL’s should still be accessible. 2.) Remove the links to the sub site (www.domain.tld/1/optimized-url) from the footer and redirect (301) all those URL’s to the newly created SEO friendly product URL’s. URL’s that cannot be matched since there is no similar catalog location in the main website will be redirected (301) to our homepage. I wonder if this is a correct approach and if it would be better to do this in a phased way rather than the currently planned big bang? Any feedback would be highly appreciated, also let me know if things are not clear. Thanks! Chris
Technical SEO | | eCommerceSEO0 -
Best Dynamic Sitemap Generator
Hello Mozers, Could you please share the best Dynamic Sitemap Generator you are using. I have found this place: http://www.seotools.kreationstudio.com/xml-sitemap-generator/free_dynamic_xml_sitemap_generator.php Thanks in advanced for your help.
Technical SEO | | SEOPractices0 -
Crawling image folders / crawl allowance
We recently removed /img and /imgp from our robots.txt file thus allowing googlebot to crawl our image folders. Not sure why we had these blocked in the first place, but we opened them up in response to an email from Google Product Search about not being able to crawl images - which can/has hurt our traffic from Google Shopping. My question is: will allowing Google to crawl our image files eat up our 'crawl allowance'? We wouldn't want Google to not crawl/index certain pages, and ding our organic traffic, because more of our allotted crawl bandwidth is getting chewed up crawling image files. Outside of the non-detailed crawl stat graphs from Webmaster Tools, what's the best way to check how frequently/ deeply our site is getting crawled? Thanks all!
Technical SEO | | evoNick0