Google pagespeed / lazy image load
-
Hi,
we are using the apache module of google pagespeed. It works really great, helps a lot. But today I've asked me one question:
Does the "lazy load" feature for images harm the ranking?
The module reworks the page to load the images only if the are visible at the screen. Is this behavior also triggered by the google bot? Or are the images invisible for google?
Any expirience about that?
Best wishes,
Georg.
-
this does a pretty good job of explaining lazy load
http://www.thesempost.com/lazy-loading-images-likely-will-indexed-google/
-
hey that was a fast response i usually dont get that response from google lol .. anyway post an update, ok? would like to know the answer aswell..
-
Yesterday, I've written a support mail to bing webmastertools. Surprisingly I got a very comprehensive answer within hours! Thumbs up!
The answer: "Yes, you are right. Since this lazy load feature is a 3<sup>rd</sup> party application, as initial troubleshooting steps and to isolate the issue, please try to turn off this feature on your end."
Well, I try to turn off the lazy load for the specific page and see what's happening.
Best wishes,
Georg. -
i think i already answered this question
" what i know is that anything generated by javascript is unreadable by any search engine robot"
so probably thats the reason why its not found on image search engine .. anyway ill wait for other answers too
-
Hi,
test google versus bing:
I am searching results for
site:schicksal.com Freitag, der 13.
Bing, organic: http://goo.gl/bfXAU0 - article found on 1st position
Bing, image search: http://goo.gl/EXDSdv - no search resultsGoogle, organic: http://goo.gl/VIi5C6 - article found on 1st position
Google, image: http://goo.gl/m5SRjA - main article image is found on 1st positionI've done some other quick checks with Bing: The big images are NOT found at the image search, only the teaser images which are on the overview pages.
So, can anybody confirm this behavior? Do Bing have a problem with the lazy load of google.pagespeed?
Best wishes,
Georg.
-
im curious too
what i know is that anything generated by javascript is unreadable by any search engine robot.. they just dont know that language its client side .. but the thing with lazy load is that the content is there just the image is not loaded until its shown on screen.. i mean the tags wrapping up the image.. if webmaster tool "fetch as googlebot" could fetch it then you dont have to worry anything.. but still i wanna know others opinion too -
Just tried to use the Google Webmaster Tool "fetch as googlebot" - the lazy loaded images where shown on the screenshot.
But the question remains: Is it possible that the google bot is not seeing the images for the ranking because the are loaded with javascript?
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
-
Specifying image dimensions for site speed vs. responsive
I'm working on improving site speed from an SEO perspective, and one bit of advice I see often is to specify the dimensions of the images you're using so the browser knows the size of the image it needs to download. However, I am wondering what impact this may have if the site is responsive? If you specify the large dimensions suited for a desktop browser, would you be forcing a mobile browser to use that sized image? Has anyone seen dramatic improvements in site speed using the <picture>tag for responsive images?</picture> Thanks! Jannette
Web Design | | JannetteP1 -
Responsive image plugins and seo / crawlability
Note : For the background of this question please read the preface below. Ive been researching responsive image options the main issue i can see with them is that they are not semantic html so bots may not index them correctly. For instance many of the responsive image plugins use data-src for an image rather than src. Does any one have any experience with this and if it impacts on SEO ? Does any one know of a client side responsive image soltion that uses a normal img tag with the image stored in the src and with the option to set an alt attribute ? **Preface : ** Ive got a site we are currently developing, the site has a large full width responsive image slider. To serve images that wont be pixilated we are making the width of the images 1800px wide (which should cover most screens, but isn't actually big enough if the site was viewed on a 27" imac) these 1800px wide images weight about 350kb - 500kb per image and our image slider has about 20 of them. As you can see this would be a problem for anyone with a connection slower than c.10 mbps. This is especially true for mobile devices that will be downloading an image 1800px wide although only require a much smaller one, this coupled with a 3g connection will make the site really slow.
Web Design | | Sam-P0 -
Redirects Not Working / Issue with Duplicate Page Titles
Hi all We are being penalised on Webmaster Tools and Crawl Diagnostics for duplicate page titles and I'm not sure how to fix it.We recently switched from HTTP to HTTPS, but when we first switched over, we accidentally set a permanent redirect from HTTPS to HTTP for a week or so(!).We now have a permanent redirect going the other way, HTTP to HTTPS, and we also have canonical tags in place to redirect to HTTPS.Unfortunately, it seems that because of this short time with the permanent redirect the wrong way round, Google is confused as sees our http and https sites as duplicate content.Is there any way to get Google to recognise this new (correct) permanent redirect and completely forget the old (incorrect) one?Any ideas welcome!
Web Design | | HireSpace0 -
Link juice passing from a .org.uk link to a .org/uk websites
Hi all, A client I am working on had a CMS built in recently which has resulted in all their canonicals tags being taken off the website, and as such the same page with both a .org/uk and .org.uk/uk domain have appeared in the search results and I am wondering what your guys take is on the best cause of action. For further background: Historically they have always used .org.uk/uk (not sure why) for their UK website and used .org/xxx for other countries (they also have a .org splashpage FYI). Having seen the .org/uk pages, and knowing they have to choose one to avoid duplication, they would like to move their uk website to the .org/uk domain to fit in with the rest of the divisions. However due to the historical use of .org.uk/uk their backlink profile contains links to both the .org.uk and .org domains. My question then: would a canonical tag on all the .org.uk/uk pages pointing to the .org/uk pages be strong enough to pass on link juice to the .org/uk pages (from all links pointing to .org.uk) or would a 301 redirect be required in this instance, or indeed would it be best to stay with the .org.uk/uk domain? Thanks, Diana
Web Design | | Diana.varbanescu0 -
Does Google penalise for alot of advertising on your site?
I look after the search side of a decorating website on which we carry a large amount of advertising from external brands as that is our business model. Do you know if we would get penalised for having too much advertising - would it be deemed to affect the user experience? Many thanks for your help on this.
Web Design | | Pday0 -
Blog vs. News/Editorial Layout?
We're in the coupon blogging space & saw that one of the larger coupon sites move away from the more traditional blog layout: http://thekrazycouponlady.com they now have more of an editorial type layout. Here is another site which is more similar to our layout: http://hip2save.com. So here are my questions: Which layout type do you feel better serves their visitors & why? How does the affect the SEO of the site? How does it affect the advertising revenues? Which layout do you prefer? Is there strategy in this move for the coupon blog, or is this just a preference on how they now display their content? We're making some updates to our design soon & I wanted to get some feedback on the overall direction we take.
Web Design | | seointern0 -
After a website redesign, what is the impact and is it a good practice to use /v2/ naming convention?
Hi mightyful SEOMoz community. We just launched a redesign of our commercial website from https://www.data-field.com to https://www.data-field.com/v2/ All URLs from previous website were 301 permanent redirect to the appropriate page in the new website, and the root domains ( /, /v2/ ) send the users to their own language content /v2/en/, /v2/fr/, /v2/zh/ Up to here everything is fine. But then I setup the usual "Share" buttons, only to find that they were displaying a "0" count. Then I realized that it was because of the root URL change from / to /v2/ My question is the following: 1. Is using /v2/ a good practice? 2. If yes, then should I link the Social tool to https://www.data-field.com/ ( only ) instead of linking it to the actual page in the address bar? Thanks for your answers.
Web Design | | NicolasE0 -
Google search issue with exact domain
We had a site from Feb-2011 to Nov-2011 at the domain amcoexterminating.com. The site was pure HTML/CSS and the daily unique visitors steadily increased over that time. So all was fine. We then moved the site to a CMS (Joomla) on Dec. 6th. From that day forward, the daily visitors went into the tank. Before the move, if you typed "amcoexterminating.com" or "amco exterminating" into Google search, the site would be the first result (as you'd expect since those are the words that make up the actua domain). But we tried this yesterday and the site did not come up at all. NOT GOOD. It would work in Yahoo or Bing, but not in Google. So obviously, the problem with Google search directly affected the daily visitors. We just checked Webmaster tools yesterday (yes, this should have been done sooner, lesson learned) and it said "Site has severe health issues - Important page blocked by robots.txt". It listed the "important" page URL and it was just a link to an image. Regardless, I wiped out the Joomla created robots.txt file and added a new one and made it just say... User-agent: *Allow: / About 14 hours later, after the new robots.txt file was recognized by Google, the "severe health" message went away. However if I search in Google for "amcoexterminating.com", it still doesn't show up and the client is concerned (as they should be). Do you think the search engines just need more time to refresh? If so, once it refreshes, should the site show up first again right away? Or is it possible the robots.txt file had nothing to do with the issue? If so, what other things could I check into that might cause Google search to not find a site even if you search for exact domain name? Please share any and all things I should look into as I need to get this site showing in Google search again (as it was before moving to the CMS). Thanks!
Web Design | | MarathonMS0