I cant seem to get my google description to show up. I add text in the bio box like the wiki barb has says to but to no avail any ideas?
How long have you waited? It can take days (weeks?) for google to pick up and show the change.
Can you post your site address here so we can at least verify that the page looks good? I'd recommend adding it to your signature so that it is always available to the helpers here. Click You! above and to the left, then Edit Signature.
I just did a view source on your home page and this is what I saw:
ADD A FEW LINES OF TEXT HERE. REMEMBER, WHATEVER YOU ADD HERE WILL PARTLY SHOW IN THE SEARCH RESULTS.
var oParams = new Object;
I doubt that's what you want to see in the search engine results. I'd recommend adding the test that you really want at the beginning of your bio box in a div that is set to hidden.
If you want to see an example, do a view source on my home page (link below), or a view source on Andy's www.moonriverphotography.com.
It just says to put descriptive information in the bio box. There is text in my bio and although it isn't a pretty description, Google should pick that up, just like it picks up the slideshow code for those who only have that in their bio. Actually, the description showing up in Google is the one I had on my old site. It's the part in blue that now says "Smugmug - blablabla" instead of "borealphoto.com".
But I don't care that much about the description on my homepage. I was just mentionning the problem. "Photo Sharing" brings the most traffic to my homepage and today, I added a link with referer link. I might as well profit from the situation.
What bothers me is the gallery descriptions but it isn't the topic here. You'll tell me to put my own description but I don't need one, Google doesn't need one (it uses the page content if there's none) and I don't want to add and hide a description just to take SM description away. I find that a bit sneaky on SM part.
I do question the wiki page. I had keywords in a gallery and couldn't find any of these images in Google. I removed them and a week later, my photos started popping up in the search results. On some occasions for a park, my gallery did better than the official site. I've come to the conclusion that keywords actually hurt more than they help.
Sorry Andy but since someone here told me that title tags were "not life changing" while everybody knows it's the single most important tag, including the article linked in the wiki page (10 things SEO don't want you to know), I've lost faith in SM advices.
Tell me what's wrong with my bio. There is text in it and Google doesn't pick it up. Also, i'd like to know why SM imposes its own gallery description.
You told me to read the wiki page. I did. I also followed some advices and it didn't work. As far as I can tell, it actually hurt. I've had a site since 2001 before SM and did fine in Google. I'm still doing fine. My galleries and images are found but the way they are presented in the search results could be better. Maybe I have a point, no? The wiki page is not the end of all things SEO. It might work for you but remember that your site is constantly referenced here and you have a high PR for a personnal photo website.
Just a little exemple... Look at the Dgrin title tag in the browser, it's says:
Google Description - Digital Grin Photography Forum
It doesn't say:
Digital Grin Photography Forum - Google Description
There is a reason why vbulletin arranges the title tag like this. It's better for SE and people are more likely to click if what they're looking for is at the beginning of the sentence. In Smugmug, every single title starts with the site name and the gallery or photo caption follows. It should be the other way around. So if someone searches for moose, it should say:
Moose - Borealphoto's Photos - Powered by Smugmug
(I'd prefer Borealphoto.com but I can live with that)
instead of:
Borealphoto's Photos - Moose - Powered by Smugmug
Besides, it's Borealphoto that's powered by Smugmug, not the moose.
Tell me what's wrong with my bio. There is text in it and Google doesn't pick it up. Also, i'd like to know why SM imposes its own gallery description.
You told me to read the wiki page. I did. I also followed some advices and it didn't work. As far as I can tell, it actually hurt. I've had a site since 2001 before SM and did fine in Google. I'm still doing fine. My galleries and images are found but the way they are presented in the search results could be better. Maybe I have a point, no? The wiki page is not the end of all things SEO. It might work for you but remember that your site is constantly referenced here and you have a high PR for a personnal photo website.
Just a little exemple... Look at the Dgrin title tag in the browser, it's says:
Google Description - Digital Grin Photography Forum
It doesn't say:
Digital Grin Photography Forum - Google Description
There is a reason why vbulletin arranges the title tag like this. It's better for SE and people are more likely to click if what they're looking for is at the beginning of the sentence. In Smugmug, every single title starts with the site name and the gallery or photo caption follows. It should be the other way around. So if someone searches for moose, it should say:
Moose - Borealphoto's Photos - Powered by Smugmug
(I'd prefer Borealphoto.com but I can live with that)
<html>
<div id="bioText">Moon River Photography by Andy Williams
Portrait, event, and senior photography. Also specializing in Landscapes
and Fine Art. New York City and Westchester County.
</div>
And when you view source, you see this:
<meta name="description" content="Moon River Photography by Andy Williams
Portrait, event, and senior photography. Also specializing in Landscapes and Fine Art. New York City and Westchester County.
Your site shows this in the Source
<meta name="description" content="Derniers ajouts -
Mini-Jpegs (de l'ancien site)
Lieux" />
Because, that's what Google indexes first. My Wiki page instructs you to take some more control over it and do like I've done. It's rather simple, do it or not, it's really up to you
Andy how long does it usually take google to catch up to the meta tags in the bio box?
and do they need to be visible or can they remain hidden on the home page.
Did you miss my post here - http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=982585&postcount=9? When I do a view source on your home page I don't see a reasonable description. Instead it says "put a few lines of text here...". That's not because of Google - that's because the text in your bio box doesn't descrbe your site.
The text that you add for search purposes does not need to be visible. Google doesn't care if it is visible on the screen; it is looking at the page source.
<meta name="description" content="Derniers ajouts -
Mini-Jpegs (de l'ancien site)
I know that. It's been like for a year, but it still doesn't doesn't show in the Google description. If I search for borealphoto, this is what I see: SmugMug Photo Sharing. Your photos look better here. Faune, flore et paysages du Québec et du Canada. Articles et nombreux liens.
The description under Smugmug spam is the one I had before I moved to Smugmug. My point is that the text in my bio is not picked up at all, not wether it's descriptive or not. Why am I still stuck with Smugmug spam as page title?
The text that you add for search purposes does not need to be visible. Google doesn't care if it is visible on the screen; it is looking at the page source
Directly from Google (under "avoid hidden text"):
Hiding text or links in your content can cause your site to be perceived as untrustworthy since it presents information to search engines differently than to visitors. Text (such as excessive keywords) can be hidden in several ways, including:
Hi Erick,
I've followed every tip that is in the Wiki and anything else I can pick up here, I've no technical knowledge other than what I have learned here.
You say that your bio text isn't picked up at all - If you do what Andy et al here are suggesting then googling your site name can look more like mine does:-
Also, changing the bio text has done more to improve results for my site when using using terms like 'mendip photographs' etc than anything else. I have struggled to get anywhere on the first page of results when using the term 'mendip' + photography/er/s etc but this has worked for me. It was picked up by google in less than 24 hours. Just give it a try, it must take you more time here arguing the point than it would to make the changes
I don't get huge numbers of hits to my site neither do I sell through SmugMug, I'm in a rural area in the UK and just want the local people to find me when they want to - it works, I was at an event on Saturday someone came up to me and commissioned a photograph - Lovely, made my day.
I know that. It's been like for a year, but it still doesn't doesn't show in the Google description. If I search for borealphoto, this is what I see: SmugMug Photo Sharing. Your photos look better here. Faune, flore et paysages du Québec et du Canada. Articles et nombreux liens.
The description under Smugmug spam is the one I had before I moved to Smugmug. My point is that the text in my bio is not picked up at all, not wether it's descriptive or not. Why am I still stuck with Smugmug spam as page title?
I've said it a thousand times, I have no problems getting found at all and people finding my homepage is the least of my worry. I want people to find galleries and photographs. Being high-ranked in the SERP is one of the things about my site I've been most proud of. I do have some knowledge of SEO but for some reason, Andy keeps trying to help me when I'm actually trying to help them. I'm not the only one here who said Smugmug could be more search engine friendly.
You found it because of the captions, not keywords. I uploaded this image quite recently (1-2 weeks) so as I said, I have no problem being found. When I uploaded images and added keywords (and captions), they didn't start showing up until I removed the keywords (but left the captions). Me thinks the keywords field isn't so great, unless you make them visible. Someboby else made the same observation on Dgrin.
And that's a big bug! With keywords, I found my images with other members' images in a "keyword gallery" like smugmug.com/keyword. So my keywords brought traffic to Smugmug and other people's images instead of my site. You can see why I don't like I'm not crazy about adding them.
There are three things that bugs me:
- The obsession over keywords. I find captions MUCH more important. Captions are used as alt tags, which is good. Instead of saying "keywords keywords keywords" on the wiki, it should say "captions captions captions and captions again".
- The lack of proper title tags.
- Smugmug forcing a gallery description on us. Meta descriptions (and meta keywords) aren't that important. If there's none, Google uses the page content, which would be the captions for most photo sites. I choose not use one because it adds clutter. The problem is the only way to have none is to add one and hide it, otherwise SM puts is own (ultimate photo sharing...). It add extra work for no reason and search engines don't like hidden text. This is just spam on SM part and it's unacceptable. We already have the "powered by Smugmug" in the footer and title tag. And to think that SM told me title tags aren't important...
Comments
Can you post your site address here so we can at least verify that the page looks good? I'd recommend adding it to your signature so that it is always available to the helpers here. Click You! above and to the left, then Edit Signature.
--- Denise
Musings & ramblings at https://denisegoldberg.blogspot.com
I didnt know it would take such a long time to update.
www.sargentphotgraphy.org
No, you can't use meta tags. I'd recommend following the recommendations in this wiki post - http://wiki.smugmug.net/display/SmugMug/Maximize+Search+Engine+Findability.
--- Denise
Musings & ramblings at https://denisegoldberg.blogspot.com
help if i could spell photography...........
www.sargentphotography.org
It's been over a year here and I still get the Smugmug description. Searching for photo sharing in google.ca, my site shows up before Smugmug.
borealphoto.smugmug.com
http://wiki.smugmug.net/display/SmugMug/Maximize+Search+Engine+Findability
put the google food in your bio box. It works.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
borealphoto.smugmug.com
If you want to see an example, do a view source on my home page (link below), or a view source on Andy's www.moonriverphotography.com.
--- Denise
Musings & ramblings at https://denisegoldberg.blogspot.com
How about right now?
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
But I don't care that much about the description on my homepage. I was just mentionning the problem. "Photo Sharing" brings the most traffic to my homepage and today, I added a link with referer link. I might as well profit from the situation.
What bothers me is the gallery descriptions but it isn't the topic here. You'll tell me to put my own description but I don't need one, Google doesn't need one (it uses the page content if there's none) and I don't want to add and hide a description just to take SM description away. I find that a bit sneaky on SM part.
I do question the wiki page. I had keywords in a gallery and couldn't find any of these images in Google. I removed them and a week later, my photos started popping up in the search results. On some occasions for a park, my gallery did better than the official site. I've come to the conclusion that keywords actually hurt more than they help.
Sorry Andy but since someone here told me that title tags were "not life changing" while everybody knows it's the single most important tag, including the article linked in the wiki page (10 things SEO don't want you to know), I've lost faith in SM advices.
borealphoto.smugmug.com
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Andy how long does it usually take google to catch up to the meta tags in the bio box?
and do they need to be visible or can they remain hidden on the home page.
You told me to read the wiki page. I did. I also followed some advices and it didn't work. As far as I can tell, it actually hurt. I've had a site since 2001 before SM and did fine in Google. I'm still doing fine. My galleries and images are found but the way they are presented in the search results could be better. Maybe I have a point, no? The wiki page is not the end of all things SEO. It might work for you but remember that your site is constantly referenced here and you have a high PR for a personnal photo website.
Just a little exemple... Look at the Dgrin title tag in the browser, it's says:
Google Description - Digital Grin Photography Forum
It doesn't say:
Digital Grin Photography Forum - Google Description
There is a reason why vbulletin arranges the title tag like this. It's better for SE and people are more likely to click if what they're looking for is at the beginning of the sentence. In Smugmug, every single title starts with the site name and the gallery or photo caption follows. It should be the other way around. So if someone searches for moose, it should say:
Moose - Borealphoto's Photos - Powered by Smugmug
(I'd prefer Borealphoto.com but I can live with that)
instead of:
Borealphoto's Photos - Moose - Powered by Smugmug
Besides, it's Borealphoto that's powered by Smugmug, not the moose.
borealphoto.smugmug.com
Hi Erick,
I use this in my bio:
BIO:
<html>
<div id="bioText">Moon River Photography by Andy Williams
Portrait, event, and senior photography. Also specializing in Landscapes
and Fine Art. New York City and Westchester County.
</div>
And when you view source, you see this:
<meta name="description" content="Moon River Photography by Andy Williams
Portrait, event, and senior photography. Also specializing in Landscapes and Fine Art. New York City and Westchester County.
Your site shows this in the Source
<meta name="description" content="Derniers ajouts -
Mini-Jpegs (de l'ancien site)
Lieux" />
Because, that's what Google indexes first. My Wiki page instructs you to take some more control over it and do like I've done. It's rather simple, do it or not, it's really up to you
Holler if I may help.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
The text that you add for search purposes does not need to be visible. Google doesn't care if it is visible on the screen; it is looking at the page source.
--- Denise
Musings & ramblings at https://denisegoldberg.blogspot.com
SmugMug Photo Sharing. Your photos look better here.
Faune, flore et paysages du Québec et du Canada. Articles et nombreux liens.
The description under Smugmug spam
borealphoto.smugmug.com
Why won't you listen to me on the other stuff? Sorry
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Directly from Google (under "avoid hidden text"):
borealphoto.smugmug.com
What other stuff?
borealphoto.smugmug.com
I've followed every tip that is in the Wiki and anything else I can pick up here, I've no technical knowledge other than what I have learned here.
You say that your bio text isn't picked up at all - If you do what Andy et al here are suggesting then googling your site name can look more like mine does:-
Also, changing the bio text has done more to improve results for my site when using using terms like 'mendip photographs' etc than anything else. I have struggled to get anywhere on the first page of results when using the term 'mendip' + photography/er/s etc but this has worked for me. It was picked up by google in less than 24 hours. Just give it a try, it must take you more time here arguing the point than it would to make the changes
I don't get huge numbers of hits to my site neither do I sell through SmugMug, I'm in a rural area in the UK and just want the local people to find me when they want to - it works, I was at an event on Saturday someone came up to me and commissioned a photograph - Lovely, made my day.
Caroline
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
borealphoto.smugmug.com
I get your site on page one of google, searching for yul trudeau dorval
yeah, we have to fix the fact that it's showing as http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/3686722_yPZFo/1/427558316_3EdxJ#427558316_3EdxJ and not your nickname - that's a bug.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Ref the bug mentioned, does that mean that the point I referred to in my thread http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=111071 is also a bug ?
Caroline
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
You found it because of the captions, not keywords. I uploaded this image quite recently (1-2 weeks) so as I said, I have no problem being found. When I uploaded images and added keywords (and captions), they didn't start showing up until I removed the keywords (but left the captions). Me thinks the keywords field isn't so great, unless you make them visible. Someboby else made the same observation on Dgrin.
And that's a big bug! With keywords, I found my images with other members' images in a "keyword gallery" like smugmug.com/keyword. So my keywords brought traffic to Smugmug and other people's images instead of my site. You can see why I don't like I'm not crazy about adding them.
There are three things that bugs me:
- The obsession over keywords. I find captions MUCH more important. Captions are used as alt tags, which is good. Instead of saying "keywords keywords keywords" on the wiki, it should say "captions captions captions and captions again".
- The lack of proper title tags.
- Smugmug forcing a gallery description on us. Meta descriptions (and meta keywords) aren't that important. If there's none, Google uses the page content, which would be the captions for most photo sites. I choose not use one because it adds clutter. The problem is the only way to have none is to add one and hide it, otherwise SM puts is own (ultimate photo sharing...). It add extra work for no reason and search engines don't like hidden text. This is just spam on SM part and it's unacceptable. We already have the "powered by Smugmug" in the footer and title tag. And to think that SM told me title tags aren't important...
borealphoto.smugmug.com