I'm honestly not trying to plug my business(es) - just wanted to explain where I'm coming from.
Here are my thoughts (from an SEO perspective) on the "How do I get my images to show up in Google search results?" question that seems to be so prevalent throughout this thread:
Google looks for relevance when it returns search results. Just because you name a photo red-roses.jpg does not mean it will be returned in the search results for "red roses", regardless of where or how the image is hosted.
You have to think of the images in Google's search results like web pages. Just because I have a website named red-roses.com does not mean it will be indexed by Google or returned in a search for "red roses".
However, if red-roses.com is a site with lots of relevant pages and content related to red roses, and I have a few hundred links from relevant and authoritative web pages pointing at my site with "red roses" in the anchor text, it probably would be indexed and rank fairly well in the search results.
I think images work the same way. Thus if you have a "trademark" image - one that you want to be returned in the Google search results when someone searches for a particular keyword phrase - I would recommend the following:
1 - Host the image in a top level domain and name it with the keywords you are targeting (i.e.: www.mywebsite.com/red-roses-photo.jpg). Notice I added the word "photo" to the file name - this seems to be a common denominator - the word "image", "photo", "portrait" or something semantically similar is usually in the file name of images that are returned in search results (and conversely, they are usually only served if you include one of these terms in your search query).
2 - Build as many links as possible from within your site and from relevant external web pages that point directly to the image's URL and contain your keywords in the anchor text (i.e. Click here to see my photos of red roses!).
3 - Ensure "enhanced image search" is activated for your domain using Google Webmaster Tools.
Obviously, one would never have time to do this for more than a few images. And that's my point - in my opinion it is a waste of time to try and get your batch images from SmugMug, Photobiz, or any other host to appear in search results.
However, I believe it can be done for a handful of your "signature" shots that you want to associate with your brand.
Of course, I should point out that I have not actually done this yet! If I ever get the time I'll post a follow up!
Photos that I uploaded when I first joined Smugmug almost exactly a year ago, are still not findable via Google or Google Image Search.
I absolutely agree with doctorgonzo in that all other features are almost insignificant if this problem with picture findability is not rectified, especially for Smugmug which is supposed to be a photo hosting site.
Firstly, does Smugmug actually accept that there is a problem here, and secondly, can you tell us in more specific terms exactly what Smugmug is doing in terms of "looking into this"?
p.s. using doctorgonzo's method, I have 6 of my images appear (out of a total of about 1500 on my site), of which one was actually posted by Andy in a forum thread.
Thank you for your input.
The problem for many of us in this discussion is not being found by Google, but our images not being returned in Google images search results, at least that is my perspective.
However, any contribution that may improve matters is certainly welcomed.
With ref to #1 this would seem to be a pretty cumbersome task for those of us who have many, many images that do not include any of the terms mentioned :-((
#2 This is tricky for a small enterprise, yes I know it is referred to in Andy's original instructions but my verdict on this is that its a case of "easier said than done".
#3 I can't find "enhanced image search" in google webmaster tools, could you point me to it please ?
However, I believe it can be done for a handful of your "signature" shots that you want to associate with your brand.
I don't have a "brand" but I have many pictures of different subjects that I want to be found, identifying a 'signature shot' is not particularly helpful. I f someone is looking for a 'mobile milking parlour' for example, I would really like them to find at least one of my images because they are unusual :-)
The issue we are having is a bit different. It's not an issue of having a photo tagged "red roses" end up high in the Google Image Search results; the issue is that 99%+ of images don't show up at all, unless we take extra steps to post those images elsewhere.
And I definitely don't think other sites work the same way. I used to host my photos on Flickr. I didn't do anything with those photos other than keyword them, but every single one of them was indexed by Google Image Search with those keywords. Now, if I had something keyworded with "red roses", I wouldn't expect it to be on the first page of Google Image Search, and it usually wasn't. But I was contacted more than once by people who found my Flickr images using Google Image Search and searching for the words that I tagged them with.
So there is clear evidence that with a properly-designed website, Google Image Search will index all photos on a site properly using keywords. Currently, SmugMug is not designed in such a way to make this possible, and this is what we are asking to be changed.
I think you hit the nail on the head with your comment about needing a "properly designed website". As I have stated in other posts, I am not that familiar with SmugMug (I use a competitor), but I had a quick look at a SmugMug-based site (Carolyn Chipsey's link above), and with a quick glance I can tell you that a major problem is that SmugMug is overusing cascading style sheets (CSS) and JAVA script - both of which Google hates.
I am not a "code guru", but I know enough to tell you that if they cleaned up their code and linked to the images directly with keyworded anchor tags, much of this problem would be solved.
The issue we are having is a bit different. It's not an issue of having a photo tagged "red roses" end up high in the Google Image Search results; the issue is that 99%+ of images don't show up at all, unless we take extra steps to post those images elsewhere.
And I definitely don't think other sites work the same way. I used to host my photos on Flickr. I didn't do anything with those photos other than keyword them, but every single one of them was indexed by Google Image Search with those keywords. Now, if I had something keyworded with "red roses", I wouldn't expect it to be on the first page of Google Image Search, and it usually wasn't. But I was contacted more than once by people who found my Flickr images using Google Image Search and searching for the words that I tagged them with.
So there is clear evidence that with a properly-designed website, Google Image Search will index all photos on a site properly using keywords. Currently, SmugMug is not designed in such a way to make this possible, and this is what we are asking to be changed.
Thank you for your input.
The problem for many of us in this discussion is not being found by Google but our images being returned in Google images search results, at least that is my persepective.
However, any contribution that may improve matters is certainly welcomed.
With ref to #1 this would seem to be a pretty cumbersome task for those of us who have many, many images that do not include any of the terms mentioned :-((
#2 This is tricky for a small enterprise, yes I know it is referred to in Andy's original instructions but my verdict on this is that its a case of "easier said than done".
#3 I can't find "enhanced image search" in google webmaster tools, could you point me to it please ?
I don't have a "brand" but I have many pictures of different subjects that I want to be found, identifying a 'signature shot' is not particularly helpful. I f someone is looking for a 'mobile milking parlour' for example, I would really like them to find at least one of my images because they are unusual :-)
I am not a "code guru", but I know enough to tell you that if they cleaned up their code and linked to the images directly with keyworded anchor tags, much of this problem would be solved.
Jeff
Hi Jeff Carolyn Chipsey here - love my new name
Thanks for your response. For the past couple of years it hasn't been a particular issue for me as photography was taking something of a back seat. However, now I find that I have been happily adding pictures to my site, keywording as necessary and yet this doesn't seem to be very effective.
Caroline (Shipsey)
EDIT - Thanks for the link for google image search
Hi Jeff Carolyn Chipsey here - love my new name
Thanks for your response. For the past couple of years it hasn't been a particular issue for me as photography was taking something of a back seat. However, now I find that I have been happily adding pictures to my site, keywording as necessary and yet this doesn't seem to be very effective.
Caroline (Shipsey)
EDIT - Thanks for the link for google image search
I know this is an old thread, but I'm posing for the benefit of future users since this is a common problem.
If you have two sites and you want to consolidate to a single site/domain, once your content is moved from Site A to Site B, all you need to do is set up a 301 Redirect from Site A to Site B.
Is is very important that you use a 301 Redirect. This will reroute all of your links, and the search engines, to Domain B, and all of the hard work you have put in building links and increasing your page rank for Domain A will transfer over to Domain B as soon as the search engines re-index your site.
You can also do this just for semantic purposes. If your domain name is too long or hard to pronounce or explain, purchase a simple, nice-sounding domain and redirect it to the long one. That way you can use the nice-sounding one in your advertising, on the phone, etc.
You can set up a 301 Redirect (also sometimes called a permanent redirect) through your domain host (Yahoo, GoDaddy, etc.) and it is easy to do - just make sure you no longer need the content on Site A before you redirect it to Site B, and make sure you use a 301 Permanent redirect or you risk losing all of your inbound links, and the search engines will index both of your sites instead of pointing everyone toward the one you want to use!
Thanks, Andy. I guess I didn't ask the right way before. What I really want to know is if changing from http://markrogersphotography.smugmug.com/ to photos.markrogersphotography.com is a better SEO move in general since I guess, technically, it means all my site content would be part of my own domain rather than smugmug's. More importantly, would changing it at this point after I've been using the old one for almost a year end up doing more harm than good? Thanks
Vox and Tumblr
Of interest, I started a flickr and picassa site with some of my photos, filled in keywords, etc etc, started a blogger blog, posted photos properly....
and the first thing to show up in Goggle? my VOX account that I used and imported photos and books and the blog into. Showed up within a few hours even, soon as I thought to check it.
I also tossed together a tumblr account (which is nicer than Vox since it auto imports instead of requiring it to be manual AND you can import photos etc) which showed up the next day.
Flickr and Picassa are still harder to make show up on the search.
So it takes a teeny bit of effort and about an hour to put it all together. But now I'm much more findable (and probably not coincidently, catspawphotos.com shows up now in goggle, not just catspaw.smugmug.com).
Course, the only image search that shows up is the banner on my website. Go. Figure. But I haven't keyworded on my own site yet so I don't expect much until I do.
How do I choose the keywords?
I am just looking for my name, location and domain name. Can I do this? How do I put in the keywords I want to be found and get rid of all the others?
Thanks!
I am just looking for my name, location and domain name. Can I do this? How do I put in the keywords I want to be found and get rid of all the others?
You can't remove the keywords that smug has added, but you can add your own.
Make sure that the first thing in your bio box is the description of your site. It can be set up so that it is not visible - as described in the gotcha in the flash slideshow help at http://wiki.smugmug.net/display/SmugMug/Flash+Slideshow.
If you look at the thread of discussion, you'll see that the issue is that the keywords are not even being indexed by Google Image Search in many cases, so this is the critical issue that Smugmug is now trying to solve, as Andy has mentioned. Once that's fixed, then yes, choosing the right keywords is very important.
I can't fix what isn't broken... now I sure hope we can improve things, yes
Keywords are CRITICALLY important now. And get found, by Google, now. Use them. Also album description (as I've mentioned in this thread).
Hi Andy,
I thought we had come to the conclusion that for many of us, it IS broken? If it was working to 'some' extent, then yes, it would be a feature that could be improved on. However, if it is not working at all for many of us (ie. Google Image Search), then I think it would be fair to say that it's broken, no?
In any case, as long as it gets fixed or improved, I don't really mind what terminology you use.
Nelson
P.S with regards to keywords being "CRITICALLY IMPORTANT" as what you and Tampa-Photography have said - yes, this is true, but for those of us where keywords are not working, it's like spending all your time filling up your cart when you don't even have a horse.
I found that keywords may bring traffic to smugmug.com/keyword instead of my site. No wonder SM wants us to use them.
Album description are not needed except to remove the one imposed by Smugmug. When there is no description, Google uses text in the page (alt tags) as description. The problem is Smugmug imposes us a bogus description about "the ultimate photo sharing and bla bla bla". So I'm paying 149$ to have no ads and still have to write and hide a description only to remove Smugmug's advertising.
I found that keywords may bring traffic to smugmug.com/keyword instead of my site. No wonder SM wants us to use them.
Surely not our intention - and I've said this to you and others till I'm blue in the face. But we can't always control how google indexes, Erick.
I havekeywords that lead to moonriverphotogrpahy.com from google.
Album description are not needed except to remove the one imposed by Smugmug.
Air is not needed unless you want to live.
Put in an album description, it's not hard and it gets the job done
When there is no description, Google uses text in the page (alt tags) as description. The problem is Smugmug imposes us a bogus description about "the ultimate photo sharing and bla bla bla". So I'm paying 149$ to have no ads and still have to write and hide a description only to remove Smugmug's advertising.
Erick, I have posted that we'll be offering a new service on top of our current pro offering - and that we listen to our customers - and that this issue would be part of the new http://smugmugpro.com so I beg your patience while we put it all together.
I can't fix what isn't broken... now I sure hope we can improve things, yes
Keywords are CRITICALLY important now. And get found, by Google, now. Use them. Also album description (as I've mentioned in this thread).
Andy,
You know I'm a great supporter of SmugMug but this issue isn't going to go away - some of your customers might though. OK, 'it' may not be broken but it certainly doesn't work effectively as it should do, and it is so exasperating that there is no acknowledgment from you that even a teeny weeny problem exists. I could demonstrate countless examples of websitegrader results to illustrate this point but I frankly don't have the time and I suspect it still wouldn't make any difference. After all, those of us complaining are in a minority, generally not event/wedding photogs etc. our business is generated in other ways and being found in google image searches is one of them.
""I havekeywords that lead to moonriverphotogrpahy.com from google"" - Andy that isn't the point, keywords that lead to images from google is the bone of contention here.
I'm sorry, I hate to write like this but I am very disappointed in SmugMug right now.
Air is not needed unless you want to live.
Put in an album description, it's not hard and it gets the job done
What kind of reply is that? Why are you so stubborn? It doesn't do anything and adds clutter to the site. I've explained this several times. This is the kind of answer that make me want to take my business somewhere else.
What kind of reply is that? Why are you so stubborn? It doesn't do anything and adds clutter to the site. I've explained this several times. This is the kind of answer that make me want to take my business somewhere else.
Erick, it's the best answer I can give right now. And it works, and I've proven it. Google crawls the album description and indexes it. I showed that months ago earlier in this thread. I'm not trying to be cute, smartass or wise, just trying to list a fact.
Can we improve it? I don't know - we'll try - but for NOW - use Album description and it'll work
I've mentioned many, many times how valuable this discussion is, how current it is (we're discussing now) and that we'll try to make more improvements to Google findability. Stubborn? Nah If that were the case, we'd be ignoring all of you and this input. I'd be out shooing instead of getting this great input from you Erick, We have a 6year history of listening to our customers and improving things where possible, and I hope we can, here. Thanks again and sorry if I came out the wrong way to you, it's not intentional I promise!
I'm sorry, I hate to write like this but I am very disappointed in SmugMug right now.
Caroline
Hi Caroline, I'm so sorry. I think there's a misunderstanding.
We're IMMENSELY interested in this. Please don't think otherwise, and I can't say it any plainer than that.
This started as a thread on how to improve your findability. There's a TON of great tips in there started by me and added by others.
Now folks are blaming SmugMug for all sorts of things Well, we know we can always improve - and we will!
I've said we can improve it -but broken, no. Don't hang on the word broken, I'm sorry I used it - sure it seems broken to some folks - we get that. There are some things we don't even understand about how Google works. We try different approaches to things all the time.
This is a very important issue to us and to you and I can't see how I can say that any more in this thread. We get it, we hear all of you, and we'll improve things.
...but I think it's fair to qualify it with an addendum, especially for people new to this thread:
"Put in an album description/keywords/caption etc., it's not hard and it gets the job done - for some users."
It surely provides more food for Google - that's what I mean. And, it changes the listing in Google's results from our generic to your specific. That's a good thing, no?
It surely provides more food for Google - that's what I mean. And, it changes the listing in Google's results from our generic to your specific. That's a good thing, no?
Yes, again, it provides more food to Google for SOME USERS. For others, we've tried feeding Google for over 12 months and the food is still in our hands. That was my point and I think is the point of the recent discussion of this thread.
If I were a new potential customer to Smugmug and I was reading what you said, I would assume that if I joined up and paid for a Pro account, uploaded my photos and keyworded them all etc, my images would be found on Google. What I'm saying is that that is not true for ALL users, so saying that would be giving them a false impression of the effectiveness of this feature that Smugmug currently offers.
Yes, again, it provides more food to Google for SOME USERS. For others, we've tried feeding Google for over 12 months and the food is still in our hands. That was my point and I think is the point of the recent discussion of this thread.
If I were a new potential customer to Smugmug and I was reading what you said, I would assume that if I joined up and paid for a Pro account, uploaded my photos and keyworded them all etc, my images would be found on Google. What I'm saying is that that is not true for ALL users, so saying that would be giving them a false impression of the effectiveness of this feature that Smugmug currently offers.
They are found By google, but not always by Google Image Search. Let's be clear about that, okay? We've said, we're trying to figure out what to do about GIS - here in this very thread.
Google crawls the album description and indexes it.
You're missing the point. I know Google indexes it, except it doesn't have any use! An album description doesn't add any information to my viewers (on the site) and doesn't add anything relevent to Google. If there's no description, Google just thinks "oh well, lets see if there other text in the page to put under the big blue text link". The problem is Smugmug puts its own advertising as description and now Google thinks my pages are about photo sharing and I have to do additional work, not to improve my site, but to paint over you ads, which should not be there in the first place. Why don't you just get out of the way?
Here's another thing I've talked about many times. The order in the titles should be reversed, with caption first, album second and site name last. Why? Because people read from left to write and Google puts a limited amount of caracters in the blue link. See how the searched term "lake wapizagonke" doesn't even show in the blue title. This is basic SEO.
They are found By google, but not always by Google Image Search. Let's be clear about that, okay? We've said, we're trying to figure out what to do about GIS - here in this very thread.
Yes, we've been stuck in this thread for so long that it was assumed knowledge that we're referring to Google Image Search, so for new readers, this is what we're referring to, which is actually more important than Google Search anyway if people are trying to look for images.
So to be clear, even after you add keywords, captions, descriptions etc, your images and galleries, CURRENTLY, it's possible that NONE of them will be found in Google Image Search. Hopefully, this will be rectified soon though, but watch this space.
You're missing the point. I know Google indexes it, except it doesn't have any use!
An album description doesn't add any information to my viewers (on the site) and doesn't add anything relevent to Google. If there's no description, Google just thinks "oh well, lets see if there other text in the page to put under the big blue text link". The problem is Smugmug puts its own advertising as description and now Google thinks my pages are about photo sharing and I have to do additional work, not to improve my site, but to paint over you ads, which should not be there in the first place. Why don't you just get out of the way?
Please, please, please understand, Erick -I'm only trying to impart info here that is useful to customers, given how things work RIGHT NOW. I'm also trying to collect this input on various topics (page titles, Google Image Search, and more) so that we can improve Google results.
Here's another thing I've talked about many times. The order in the titles should be reversed, with caption first, album second and site name last. Why? Because people read from left to write and Google puts a limited amount of caracters in the blue link. See how the searched term "lake wapizagonke" doesn't even show in the blue title. This is basic SEO.
Comments
Hello,
I am new to D-Grin, but I have one foot in the photography business (my wife and I own Simple Treasures Photography in Tampa Bay FL, and I also own a search engine optimization company called Tampa Bay Search.
I'm honestly not trying to plug my business(es) - just wanted to explain where I'm coming from.
Here are my thoughts (from an SEO perspective) on the "How do I get my images to show up in Google search results?" question that seems to be so prevalent throughout this thread:
Google looks for relevance when it returns search results. Just because you name a photo red-roses.jpg does not mean it will be returned in the search results for "red roses", regardless of where or how the image is hosted.
You have to think of the images in Google's search results like web pages. Just because I have a website named red-roses.com does not mean it will be indexed by Google or returned in a search for "red roses".
However, if red-roses.com is a site with lots of relevant pages and content related to red roses, and I have a few hundred links from relevant and authoritative web pages pointing at my site with "red roses" in the anchor text, it probably would be indexed and rank fairly well in the search results.
I think images work the same way. Thus if you have a "trademark" image - one that you want to be returned in the Google search results when someone searches for a particular keyword phrase - I would recommend the following:
1 - Host the image in a top level domain and name it with the keywords you are targeting (i.e.: www.mywebsite.com/red-roses-photo.jpg). Notice I added the word "photo" to the file name - this seems to be a common denominator - the word "image", "photo", "portrait" or something semantically similar is usually in the file name of images that are returned in search results (and conversely, they are usually only served if you include one of these terms in your search query).
2 - Build as many links as possible from within your site and from relevant external web pages that point directly to the image's URL and contain your keywords in the anchor text (i.e. Click here to see my photos of red roses!).
3 - Ensure "enhanced image search" is activated for your domain using Google Webmaster Tools.
Obviously, one would never have time to do this for more than a few images. And that's my point - in my opinion it is a waste of time to try and get your batch images from SmugMug, Photobiz, or any other host to appear in search results.
However, I believe it can be done for a handful of your "signature" shots that you want to associate with your brand.
Of course, I should point out that I have not actually done this yet! If I ever get the time I'll post a follow up!
I look forward to your feedback.
http://digitalgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1042782&postcount=272
Thank you for your input.
The problem for many of us in this discussion is not being found by Google, but our images not being returned in Google images search results, at least that is my perspective.
However, any contribution that may improve matters is certainly welcomed.
With ref to #1 this would seem to be a pretty cumbersome task for those of us who have many, many images that do not include any of the terms mentioned :-((
#2 This is tricky for a small enterprise, yes I know it is referred to in Andy's original instructions but my verdict on this is that its a case of "easier said than done".
#3 I can't find "enhanced image search" in google webmaster tools, could you point me to it please ?
I don't have a "brand" but I have many pictures of different subjects that I want to be found, identifying a 'signature shot' is not particularly helpful. I f someone is looking for a 'mobile milking parlour' for example, I would really like them to find at least one of my images because they are unusual :-)
Thanks again,
Caroline
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
The issue we are having is a bit different. It's not an issue of having a photo tagged "red roses" end up high in the Google Image Search results; the issue is that 99%+ of images don't show up at all, unless we take extra steps to post those images elsewhere.
And I definitely don't think other sites work the same way. I used to host my photos on Flickr. I didn't do anything with those photos other than keyword them, but every single one of them was indexed by Google Image Search with those keywords. Now, if I had something keyworded with "red roses", I wouldn't expect it to be on the first page of Google Image Search, and it usually wasn't. But I was contacted more than once by people who found my Flickr images using Google Image Search and searching for the words that I tagged them with.
So there is clear evidence that with a properly-designed website, Google Image Search will index all photos on a site properly using keywords. Currently, SmugMug is not designed in such a way to make this possible, and this is what we are asking to be changed.
I am not a "code guru", but I know enough to tell you that if they cleaned up their code and linked to the images directly with keyworded anchor tags, much of this problem would be solved.
Jeff
Actually Google now calls it simply "Image Search" and it is under the settings tab. See attached for a screenshot.
Also, see my post # 1043071 below.
Jeff
Hi Jeff Carolyn Chipsey here - love my new name
Thanks for your response. For the past couple of years it hasn't been a particular issue for me as photography was taking something of a back seat. However, now I find that I have been happily adding pictures to my site, keywording as necessary and yet this doesn't seem to be very effective.
Caroline (Shipsey)
EDIT - Thanks for the link for google image search
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
What part of the UK are you in? My wife is from South Wales.
Jeff
Hi Jeff,
No offence taken - I'm on the Mendip Hills in Somerset :-)
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
If you have two sites and you want to consolidate to a single site/domain, once your content is moved from Site A to Site B, all you need to do is set up a 301 Redirect from Site A to Site B.
Is is very important that you use a 301 Redirect. This will reroute all of your links, and the search engines, to Domain B, and all of the hard work you have put in building links and increasing your page rank for Domain A will transfer over to Domain B as soon as the search engines re-index your site.
You can also do this just for semantic purposes. If your domain name is too long or hard to pronounce or explain, purchase a simple, nice-sounding domain and redirect it to the long one. That way you can use the nice-sounding one in your advertising, on the phone, etc.
Here is an example:
My marketing site, www.TampaBaySearch.net
is 301 redirected to
www.tampa-bay-fl-search-seo.com
Try it and see how it works.
You can set up a 301 Redirect (also sometimes called a permanent redirect) through your domain host (Yahoo, GoDaddy, etc.) and it is easy to do - just make sure you no longer need the content on Site A before you redirect it to Site B, and make sure you use a 301 Permanent redirect or you risk losing all of your inbound links, and the search engines will index both of your sites instead of pointing everyone toward the one you want to use!
Hope that helps!
Jeff Copeland
Of interest, I started a flickr and picassa site with some of my photos, filled in keywords, etc etc, started a blogger blog, posted photos properly....
and the first thing to show up in Goggle? my VOX account that I used and imported photos and books and the blog into. Showed up within a few hours even, soon as I thought to check it.
I also tossed together a tumblr account (which is nicer than Vox since it auto imports instead of requiring it to be manual AND you can import photos etc) which showed up the next day.
Flickr and Picassa are still harder to make show up on the search.
So it takes a teeny bit of effort and about an hour to put it all together. But now I'm much more findable (and probably not coincidently, catspawphotos.com shows up now in goggle, not just catspaw.smugmug.com).
Course, the only image search that shows up is the banner on my website. Go. Figure. But I haven't keyworded on my own site yet so I don't expect much until I do.
I am just looking for my name, location and domain name. Can I do this? How do I put in the keywords I want to be found and get rid of all the others?
Thanks!
Make sure that the first thing in your bio box is the description of your site. It can be set up so that it is not visible - as described in the gotcha in the flash slideshow help at http://wiki.smugmug.net/display/SmugMug/Flash+Slideshow.
Did you take the steps outlined in the first post of this thread? Have you seen this page - http://wiki.smugmug.net/display/SmugMug/Maximize+Search+Engine+Findability?
--- Denise
Musings & ramblings at https://denisegoldberg.blogspot.com
Choosing the right keywords is more than i can explain in a post, but I can point you in the right direction:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=121344
Hi Tampa-Photography,
If you look at the thread of discussion, you'll see that the issue is that the keywords are not even being indexed by Google Image Search in many cases, so this is the critical issue that Smugmug is now trying to solve, as Andy has mentioned. Once that's fixed, then yes, choosing the right keywords is very important.
Nelson
Website: www.lookingglassphotography.com.au
Blog: http://lookingglassphotography.posterous.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LookingGlassPho
Keywords are CRITICALLY important now. And get found, by Google, now. Use them. Also album description (as I've mentioned in this thread).
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Hi Andy,
I thought we had come to the conclusion that for many of us, it IS broken? If it was working to 'some' extent, then yes, it would be a feature that could be improved on. However, if it is not working at all for many of us (ie. Google Image Search), then I think it would be fair to say that it's broken, no?
In any case, as long as it gets fixed or improved, I don't really mind what terminology you use.
Nelson
P.S with regards to keywords being "CRITICALLY IMPORTANT" as what you and Tampa-Photography have said - yes, this is true, but for those of us where keywords are not working, it's like spending all your time filling up your cart when you don't even have a horse.
Website: www.lookingglassphotography.com.au
Blog: http://lookingglassphotography.posterous.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LookingGlassPho
Album description are not needed except to remove the one imposed by Smugmug. When there is no description, Google uses text in the page (alt tags) as description. The problem is Smugmug imposes us a bogus description about "the ultimate photo sharing and bla bla bla". So I'm paying 149$ to have no ads and still have to write and hide a description only to remove Smugmug's advertising.
borealphoto.smugmug.com
I havekeywords that lead to moonriverphotogrpahy.com from google.
Air is not needed unless you want to live.
Put in an album description, it's not hard and it gets the job done
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Andy,
You know I'm a great supporter of SmugMug but this issue isn't going to go away - some of your customers might though. OK, 'it' may not be broken but it certainly doesn't work effectively as it should do, and it is so exasperating that there is no acknowledgment from you that even a teeny weeny problem exists. I could demonstrate countless examples of websitegrader results to illustrate this point but I frankly don't have the time and I suspect it still wouldn't make any difference. After all, those of us complaining are in a minority, generally not event/wedding photogs etc. our business is generated in other ways and being found in google image searches is one of them.
""I havekeywords that lead to moonriverphotogrpahy.com from google"" - Andy that isn't the point, keywords that lead to images from google is the bone of contention here.
I'm sorry, I hate to write like this but I am very disappointed in SmugMug right now.
Caroline
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
What kind of reply is that? Why are you so stubborn? It doesn't do anything and adds clutter to the site. I've explained this several times. This is the kind of answer that make me want to take my business somewhere else.
borealphoto.smugmug.com
Can we improve it? I don't know - we'll try - but for NOW - use Album description and it'll work
I've mentioned many, many times how valuable this discussion is, how current it is (we're discussing now) and that we'll try to make more improvements to Google findability. Stubborn? Nah
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
...but I think it's fair to qualify it with an addendum, especially for people new to this thread:
"Put in an album description/keywords/caption etc., it's not hard and it gets the job done - for some users."
Website: www.lookingglassphotography.com.au
Blog: http://lookingglassphotography.posterous.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LookingGlassPho
We're IMMENSELY interested in this. Please don't think otherwise, and I can't say it any plainer than that.
This started as a thread on how to improve your findability. There's a TON of great tips in there started by me and added by others.
Now folks are blaming SmugMug for all sorts of things
I've said we can improve it -but broken, no. Don't hang on the word broken, I'm sorry I used it - sure it seems broken to some folks - we get that. There are some things we don't even understand about how Google works. We try different approaches to things all the time.
This is a very important issue to us and to you and I can't see how I can say that any more in this thread. We get it, we hear all of you, and we'll improve things.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Yes, again, it provides more food to Google for SOME USERS. For others, we've tried feeding Google for over 12 months and the food is still in our hands. That was my point and I think is the point of the recent discussion of this thread.
If I were a new potential customer to Smugmug and I was reading what you said, I would assume that if I joined up and paid for a Pro account, uploaded my photos and keyworded them all etc, my images would be found on Google. What I'm saying is that that is not true for ALL users, so saying that would be giving them a false impression of the effectiveness of this feature that Smugmug currently offers.
Website: www.lookingglassphotography.com.au
Blog: http://lookingglassphotography.posterous.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LookingGlassPho
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
You're missing the point. I know Google indexes it, except it doesn't have any use! An album description doesn't add any information to my viewers (on the site) and doesn't add anything relevent to Google. If there's no description, Google just thinks "oh well, lets see if there other text in the page to put under the big blue text link". The problem is Smugmug puts its own advertising as description and now Google thinks my pages are about photo sharing and I have to do additional work, not to improve my site, but to paint over you ads, which should not be there in the first place. Why don't you just get out of the way?
Here's another thing I've talked about many times. The order in the titles should be reversed, with caption first, album second and site name last. Why? Because people read from left to write and Google puts a limited amount of caracters in the blue link. See how the searched term "lake wapizagonke" doesn't even show in the blue title. This is basic SEO.
borealphoto.smugmug.com
Yes, we've been stuck in this thread for so long that it was assumed knowledge that we're referring to Google Image Search, so for new readers, this is what we're referring to, which is actually more important than Google Search anyway if people are trying to look for images.
So to be clear, even after you add keywords, captions, descriptions etc, your images and galleries, CURRENTLY, it's possible that NONE of them will be found in Google Image Search. Hopefully, this will be rectified soon though, but watch this space.
Website: www.lookingglassphotography.com.au
Blog: http://lookingglassphotography.posterous.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LookingGlassPho
How can it not have use if it improves the listing?
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=822944#post822944
Please, please, please understand, Erick -I'm only trying to impart info here that is useful to customers, given how things work RIGHT NOW. I'm also trying to collect this input on various topics (page titles, Google Image Search, and more) so that we can improve Google results. Thanks for the input on this one!
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter