Right-click Protection and Google Images

flyingpylon

Has anyone happened to notice if right-click protected photos get picked up by Google Images or not?

Seems like they wouldn't, but rather than embark on a lengthy testing process I figured I'd see if anyone else already knows.

The reason I assume they wouldn't is because of the way Smugmug's right-click protection works, with the actual photo image URL being presented in a style tag as opposed to a regular image tag.

DodgeV83

I'm guessing google would just get that empty file you get when you try right clicking anyway.

Andy

Takes you back to the gallery:

http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=andy+big+skies&btnG=Search

LiquidOps

Andy wrote:

Takes you back to the gallery:

http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=andy+big+skies&btnG=Search

I'm not sure this is correct Andy...

When you click on the link that google images found... then click "See Image Full Size" it takes me to a full size image that I can save and such.

maybe i'm confused...

not the first time though

took me to this - http://www.moonriverphotography.com/photos/3956829-L.jpg

Steven

Andy

LiquidOps wrote:

I'm not sure this is correct Andy...

When you click on the link that google images found... then click "See Image Full Size" it takes me to a full size image that I can save and such.

maybe i'm confused...

not the first time though

took me to this - http://www.moonriverphotography.com/photos/3956829-L.jpg



Steven

It's because I have external linking allowed in that gallery. Standby I'll find one that has no external links allowed. Actually there - I just turned off ext links and you now can't see the image that way.

flyingpylon

Okay, let me explain a little more about why I'm asking...

I think it's good for Google to find photos and list them in Google Images (assuming I have them watermarked). But I'm not sure they will even find them in the first place if the photos are right-click protected because of the way the protection is implemented, as noted in my first post.

So this isn't really about external linking, etc. It's strictly about whether the Google bots will find the image and add it to their index. I assume they're smart enough to exclude tiny images like spacer.gif. But are they smart enough to look into a style tag and grab the real image? I don't know.

Andy

flyingpylon wrote:

Okay, let me explain a little more about why I'm asking...

I think it's good for Google to find photos and list them in Google Images (assuming I have them watermarked). But I'm not sure they will even find them in the first place if the photos are right-click protected because of the way the protection is implemented, as noted in my first post.

So this isn't really about external linking, etc. It's strictly about whether the Google bots will find the image and add it to their index. I assume they're smart enough to exclude tiny images like spacer.gif. But are they smart enough to look into a style tag and grab the real image? I don't know.

They will find your image if it's right-click protected. I gave example above..

LiquidOps

Andy wrote:

It's because I have external linking allowed in that gallery. Standby I'll find one that has no external links allowed. Actually there - I just turned off ext links and you now can't see the image that way.

but as long as you have easy sharing enabled... it can still be copied...

http://www.moonriverphotography.com/photos/3956829-L-1.jpg

Steven

Andy

LiquidOps wrote:

but as long as you have easy sharing enabled... it can still be copied...

http://www.moonriverphotography.com/photos/3956829-L-1.jpg

Steven

Easy Sharing is NOT External Linking - you're thinking of external links. BTW, shift-refresh and that link no longer works, Steven, as I turned external links off for that gallery to demonstrate that our features work as advertised

flyingpylon

Thanks for the clarifications Andy. Sounds like it works the way I want it to.

I think most of us realize that if you display your photos on the web, technically savvy users will still be able to find and download them. But if it's that much of a concern, that's what watermarking is for.