CSS background images weight impact
-
Hi,
do you think that the use of a single 1.8Mb background image sitewide could have a big negative impact and make a website disappear from SERPS?thank you
-
Hi Gianni,
There are a ton of reasons why your website might have slipped down the SERPs or dropped rankings. It's almost certainly not because of your image.
If you want, you can PM me your URL and I'll have a look.
Nick
-
Hello,
I think the heavy wheight background image has been wrongly pubilshed without the proper jpg compression during last months... (maybe a webdesigner distraction).Anyway now the website is disappeared from SERPS,
I'm trying to spot the possible reason of this penalization, currently the homepage ranks "A" with Seomoz on page optimization tool for the primary keyword, and it's domain metrics are equals or superior to many competitors that rank in first page for the same keyword.
With this heavy wheight background image the overall wheight of the internal pages is about 2.8 Mb (html/css + scripts + inline images + css background images ), I think this is a really uncommon and high value.
If Google considers a page as "loaded" when all of its assets were actually downloaded from the server and not when the event "load" fires on the browser I think it could be a very negative factor.
Thank you all for your replies
(and sorry for my english) -
That is a pretty large image file, I do not know how it would impact the SERPS.
If you are using photoshop and saving the background image as a Jpg, one thing I always try to do is lower the quality when saving for web to around 30-40 for really large images (can notice a difference but not too bad) or lower the quality to 51 if you want the image to remain pretty much the same.
Another thing that I like to do is use Smush.it (http://www.smushit.com/ysmush.it/) which is a free tool from Yahoo that will save you a little on filesize without changing the appearance of the image.
Hope this helps!
-
1.8mb is HUGE, what on earth is in there? I have a full background complex image for one of my websites - it's 90kb. Even the biggest CSS sprite image I have is just 30kb that includes most of my site template.
I recommend that you revisit this and use a different image format if not jpg/png/gif - for example never use tif or BMP online.
A background this size will really look poor to your first time visitors - this is exactly why Google want to start using speed as a ranking factor.
-
Just to add - try and compress the image as much as you can.
I'd be more worried about waiting for it to load and it having a knock on effect on your user experience.
DD
-
Hi Gianni,
of course the huge image won't make the website disappear from the serps - if you define "disappear" that the website is banned from the index.
I suppose you know that speed / loading time already matters, but it is just one of many ranking factors and Matt Cutts said that very rare pages are concerned. But imagine that there is a website with exactely the same condition as yours then the one with less loading time will be "better" than yours.
Even though the image is in the css defined it is not the best idea. Did you really compress the image yet?
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
-
Google Reviews Plugin - Does This Impact Negatively On SEO By Diluting Optimisation
I know optimisation is now considered 'old hat' but like many old hats not only is it comfortable but it is (in my experience) still functional and working in ranking websites. Yes there are plenty of other drivers, but I still consider optimisation to be important, hence the question Google Reviews Plugin - Does This Impact Negatively On SEO By Diluting Optimisation? From my (limited in many ways) understanding this puts hundreds if not thousands of extra words on a page - so this must surely be reducing the amount of optimisation? And then could it actually lead to a decline in rankings? Has anyone had any experience in this, I would love to use the Google Reviews plugin but just wanted to be sure first... Many thanks KT
On-Page Optimization | | Markkc1 -
How important are image file names
Hi, How important do you think the image file names are for image search?
On-Page Optimization | | jjtech
I know it used to be the best practice a while ago but is it still important? Thanks in advance, JJ0 -
Image Alt and Title?
I'm building a quotations website. Each quotation will have between 1 and 5 images (picture quotes) associated with it. The images will be featured as thumbnails (image gallery) on the quote post itself. How should I handle the image alt and title tags so that I rank better for a quote in image search, and also strengthen the ranking signals on the quote post itself? Take for example, a photo of a beach and a photo of the sun. Both have the same quote on it: "Laughter is an instant vacation." Should the quote itself go into the alt tag? while the description of the image goes into the title? Or should the quote go into the title? Would this be correct? Title: Beach with children playing in the sand. Alt: "Laughter is an instant vacation." Title: Sun shining in the sky. Alt: "Laughter is an instant vacation." What about if the quote is very long? Google has said they like when the alt and title tags are short.
On-Page Optimization | | JABacchetta0 -
Alt image tags not being read by on-page optimization tool
Can bots see the keyword among other words in aIt image tags? For example, if the keyword is upholstery leather and the image tag says "our upholstery leather collection" will the keyword be recognized? Another example is buy leather. I have a image tag on a slide that reads "free samples before you buy leather" but an on-page analysis in moz does not show an alt tag title for buy leather? Same problem with an moz on-page analysis of the term upholstery leather. Thanks! Hunter
On-Page Optimization | | leatherhidestore0 -
Nofollow images to sculpt internal anchor tags
One of my client tags image-links with nofollow if those links are before a regular HTML link in the source code, e.g.:
On-Page Optimization | | Sebes
.
.
.
Check our page aboutreally cool shoes. They do this to "better pass anchor tags" to the page /page-about-shoes.html. My question: Is this a good practice to do? Thanks Sebes0 -
Images being ranked
I have a client who is concerned about the performance of his images ranking on Google Images. I have taken a look at the obvious things like - alt tags, title tags , file names. I am not sure why he is struggling quite so much to get his images ranked well as the sites he is competing against and who are already ranking are a very poor quality. This is his site - http://www.ukweddingfavours.co.uk Would really appreciate your feedback and I can dish out some good answers.
On-Page Optimization | | onlinemediadirect0 -
Image file name, is it important
If I use the same image all over my site, do I need to change the file name to avoid duplicate? Different alt text will be use on those images
On-Page Optimization | | BigBlaze2050 -
Google seems upset that I took their advice. [Titles and alt tags for images.]
Hey all, I accidentally posted this as a private question and now want to post it publicly due to some updates (for the worse.) I'm a photographer and the site I'm talking about is my portfolio site. It is very image heavy and had basically no text. Those who have consistently beat me (positions 1,2, etc.) in SERPs for my key search phrases have a modest amount of text on their pages. I'd been doing OK in SERPs (top 3-5 for my key search phrases) over the past couple years and my site has decent age and domain authority (a good number of relevant inbound links from extremely reputable sources over the years, etc. etc.) [In case it matters, my root domain has a PageRank of 4 and I have a couple internal pages with PR5.] For years I resisted adding any text because I was trying to obey Google's rule to design "for people, not search engines." Over the past couple of months, though, I got some advice on the SEOMoz webinar about adding (relevant) alt text and body text, and also read Google's Webmaster Central article about giving images good titles and alt tags, so I decided to take the plunge about ten days ago. I went through the site and added modest amounts of relevant text to pages where it was appropriate and where it didn't detract (too much) from the design. I made sure my images had sensible human-readable alt tags that were descriptive and made sure not to do any keyword stuffing. Finally, I edited some of my page titles so that they were a little more descriptive. Again, nothing extreme or radical or spammy. (But overall, esp. from Google's perspective, there were some fairly significant changes in a short period of time.) Well.. you're all already guessing what's next. As soon as Google saw these changes, I tanked pretty badly. I went from position 3-5 on my key phrases to positions like 16-25 and spent a few days in those positions. Now I'm just gone & buried somewhere in Google's boneyard. My latest ranking report for today shows me "not in top 50" for any of my key phrases on Google. I'm #1 for many of those same terms/phrases on Bing and Yahoo. (Always have fared very well with them.) Google's webmaster tools says my sitemap is OK and most of the URLs submitted are in the index. Please tell me this is temporary, while Google deals with my changes? (Actually don't, just tell me what you really think.) 🙂 Thank you all...
On-Page Optimization | | vdms0