Interestingly, some of his photos on SmugMug are index by GIS, for example this one: http://www.borealphoto.com/gallery/3...29_VmSkZ/Large . Honestly, that's a display mode of SmugMug that I've never seen before. It's not the typical gallery display that I am used to (such as this: http://www.borealphoto.com/gallery/3...4073450_cDbox). The image that was indexed by GIS had a link to the JPG file itself in the page source. I'm not sure how to get my galleries to look like that, however.
I see 583 images and I'd say "most" are on borealphoto.com and "some" are on blogs and forums.
As for the display page, I believe SM calls it "single image view" and that what it looks like for single image in several styles. I haven't done anything to make them look like that. I thought Google found them easier to index for the same reasons you stated. But note that some images do lead to Smugmug style. I often find the same image next to each other in GIS, one leading to a single page and the other leading to the Smugmug style gallery.
EDIT: For the record, I have 1030 photos uploaded. Some images in GIS show up twice (different sizes). Quite a few of my pics don't have captions and a quick scan of GIS result for my site tells me the bulk of those images aren't indexed. Caption your images!
Image in Google Image Search Results
I just wanted to follow up on this post and share an example of this actually working.
If you search on Google Image search for "Miami Florida Beach Wedding", one of the first results you'll come across is a long shot of a bride and groom standing on the beach facing right. This images is from a site I built that is at www.miami-florida-beach-wedding.com.
Using the techniques listed below, this image ranks #1 in Google Image Search.
Of course I freely admit this is too labor-intensive to do with hundreds of images, but it still proves a solid point!
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!
How good is SM doing on Google Image Search (GIS)? Inspired by this thread and a video from Google's Peter Linsley about "Get up-to-date on Image Search":<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p> Video (15 min): http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/03/get-up-to-date-on-image-search.html I asked myself: How good is SM doing on Google Image Search (GIS)? And how good is the visitor experience with people coming from GIS?
<o:p></o:p> I tried many different keywords (with between 500 and 999 hits in SM excellent search engine) and the word "caracara" turned up to be give about average result for SM. Thumbnails from SM are very unreliable in Google Image search. Most of them do not lead you to a caracara in SM (Google Earth files, Thumbnail from today’s popular etc). Thumbnails will not likely turn up in a any Google Image Search and that is good, especially for a visitor and also for SM, so I counted only images before the first Thumbnail. <o:p></o:p> I Have chosen to compare with Pbase because they also have an inside search engine which I could use, and Panoramio because it is owned by Google, so this gives an estimate of the practical percentage of images you can expect to see in GIS. (Just like Flickr images in Yahoo image search), <o:p></o:p> Images in SM: 783 and 100% accurate.
Images in GIS: 15 and 66% accurate. Typical res 400x268. 5 linking to a www-URL, 5 linking to a Nickname-URL and 5 photos not linking to a caracara in SM.
Note: SM removes the frame when clicking an image from GIS, which makes it impossible to hit the "Back" for continuing the image search. This is really annoying.
Verdict for SM: 1.91% of images in GIS with poor resolution - and a bad user experience.
<o:p></o:p> to comparison: result for Pbase:
Images in Pbase: 1408 - 100% accurate
Images in GIS: 223 - 100% accurate. Typical res 800x500
Verdict for Pbase: 15.83% of images in GIS with medium resolution - and a very good user experience.
<o:p></o:p> to comparison with my images in panoramio which are not in my SM galleries: <o:p></o:p> Images in panoramio : 44
Images in GIS: 23 - 100% accurate. typical res 1100x800
Verdict for Panoramio(alone): 52.27% of images in GIS with original resolution - and a very good user experience.
(Theese photos do not exists anywhere else on the internet)
<o:p></o:p> to comparison with my images in panoramio which are also in my SM galleries: <o:p></o:p> Images in panoramio : 36
Images in GIS: 7 - 100% accurate. typical res 1100x800
Verdict for Panoramio(+SM): 19.44% of images in GIS -with original resolution and a very good user experience.
(I cannot give an explanation to this - GIS might find similar images in SM and regard them as dublicates or ????)
(I have moved half of these images to a gallery not seen by SM or Google to see if this will make a difference. The weeks to come will tell)
<o:p></o:p> All with more or less the same content. Many of them with the same title, and all of them a different page-URL. A major no-no according to Google: http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35769
<o:p></o:p> The 8 photos from SM actually being indexed in GIS ware either the only photo in a gallery or (my guess) had been no 1 in a "most popular" gallery for a while.
Half of them - especially those with highest rating - have a page title like: nickname: photos: Galleryname (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug
<o:p></o:p> Search engines base their logic on 20+ different parameters. Among the most important - if not the most important - is the page title and then the text (alt= for an image). This is what is everyone says, and this is the information shown to users of search engines. <o:p></o:p> GIS do find SM photos, but they find the same photo again and again on different pages, some disappear again, some have another image, and they all have more or less the same content and page title. <o:p></o:p> So how can we SM-users even hope to get a better percentage of our photos in GIS? <o:p></o:p>
You as an SM-user can do this now:<o:p></o:p>
1. Get more page titles - In "Site-wide Customization" delete your "Page Title"
your page titles will now look like "nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug
2. Make more galleries - with a descriptive name and description - and add only one photo at a time. Wait until your image is indexed with GIS on an URL like nickname.smugmug.com/gallery/xxxxxxx-yyyy/1/zzzzzzz-qqqq/Original - (Blog entries will speed of this process - Andy has to some degree successfully done this). Then add another photo in position 1 - wait again - and so on.
3. Make sure to add caption and keywords to your images
4. If your Image is found and indexed by GIS in a good quality - do NOT move it to another gallery.
5 If you promote your photos on blogs or other places - do NOT move to another gallery – The image link will be invalidated and reference another image (The first photo in that gallery)
6? Both pro’s and con’s. For those of you having a Custom navbar.
A lot of your visitors from Google will enter your homepage on a www.smugmug.com URL. Your homepage customization will be gone unless you gallery is in a community (and pick a gallery that will allow your customization to be visible). Be sure to add an absolute path to navbar if the URL is not pointing to a gallery or "/popular" will then reference "www.smugmug.com/popular" and that is SM's main page and not you popular photos. Adding your gallery will add a lot of redundant URL’s to your pages and more visitors entering your galleries from Google will end up on a www-URL instead of your Nickname-URL. A better workaround might be to disable SM search for your galleries, and make sure you are not on any of the SM and communities popular galleries. <o:p></o:p>
OR wait for SM to come with a solution.
<o:p></o:p> I have already done no 1, 3 and I am testing no 2. And with great success (for a beginner SM like me): Before: 1 or 2 visit from Google text search a week. Now 24 hours later - 5 visits from Google in a day and Google have so far only indexed a few of these pages. GIS will take much longer - weeks or months. <o:p></o:p>
SM can do this - and this is by far the best solution:<o:p></o:p>
1. change the URL's to all photos in SM to something like nickname.smugmug.com/photos/zzzzzzz-qqqq(photo-id) and then use the # for gallery-id and other information like page no etc. Search engines apparently do not find the stuff after the #.
2. Change the page-title to the relevant image caption no matter what gallery the image is in.
for nickname.smugmug.com/gallery/zzzzzzz-xxxxxxx-yyyy(gallery-id) use the gallery caption.
for nickname.smugmug.com/community/Birds add an informative text like "Photo gallery of birds".
and so on
and Change the META text, keywords and h1-4 captions on a page or feed to follow the same rule.
3. Do not let GIS index www.smugmug.com URL's, or make sure that the same page do not have different URL's.
4. Let the default image size be Original like you already do in www.smugmug.com/gallery/xxxxxxx-yyyy/1/zzzzzzz-qqqq/Origin al type of pages. Google search engines will see the big size image in the page and you will change it to Large/Medium/Small before is it sent to the user. (Image sizes and quality are important factors in GIS)
5?. Give SM-users better control over their page titles: about "powered by SmugMug" I do not know.
"take off (juvenile Northern Caracara)" is better than "savingflorida: photos: take off (juvenile Northern Caracara)"
First word in title is very important: If your name is "David Attenborough" it might be OK to use as the first words in the title.
6?. Implement image file name for those who really want it. It is not important compared to Page title, Captions and Meta description. Changing an image file name might make I it necessary for GIS to start all over for an image.
7. These changes will also make it easy to implement virtual galleries as requested by many SM-users.<o:p></o:p>
Or shotly: Pay attention to search engine recommendations for webmasters - Make a small number of high quality URL's instead of a large number of redundant poor quality URL's. It will also generate a lot more traffic from search engine users to SM, but you guys in SM probably already know all this. <o:p></o:p>
Please contact me if I can be of any help regarding this search issue. I will be glad to help. (I am an experienced IT-professional with focus on problem solving and testing.). <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p> Conclusion:<o:p></o:p> Please, Please, Please SM, Please do something about this search issue very soon. Please, Please, Please SM, Please give us an estimate. This discussion has taken place for a long, long time. Please, Please, Please SM, Please consider this to be the most important issue for the time being. <o:p></o:p> Thanks
Allan from Denmark<o:p></o:p> SM Home: http://lichtenhansen.smugmug.com/ Panoramio home: http://www.panoramio.com/user/2512952 Still a big fan of SM. Once you are inside SM, it is really fantastic. <o:p></o:p>
I have embedded keywords into my photos that smugmug seems to be utilizing. When tagging my photos I put my name in the "Author" field and not in the keywords. Does smugmug use other fields such as "Author", "Subject" and "Location" or should all information be entered as keywords?
I have embedded keywords into my photos that smugmug seems to be utilizing. When tagging my photos I put my name in the "Author" field and not in the keywords. Does smugmug use other fields such as "Author", "Subject" and "Location" or should all information be entered as keywords?
From the IPTC data, we only use 2 fields currently: IPTC caption and IPTC keywords. The caption is imported as the SmugMug caption and the keywords go into the SmugMug keywords.
A. get your website found in Google
B. get your images (SM) found in Google?
I think the answer is A
If the answer is A..... does it follow that.....
A = B ?
OMG I sound like a math class! lol
Seriously.... I have had MUCH more success getting my pages / website on Google page 1 than my images. But... if getting my website on Google first page gets me viewers viewing my images.......
isn't that what we are trying to accomplish anyway?
Have a great day!
Markjay
Markjay
Canon AE1 - it was my first "real camera"
Canon 20D - no more film!
Hi Allan, Thank you for your excellent in-depth post and also your offer to help Smugmug to rectify this problem.
Dear Smugmug, this issue, once again seems to have fallen by the wayside. As you can see, Smugmug users have invested a huge amount of time in trying to illustrate this problem and suggest fixes. Are you able to give us any updates on what steps are being taken to fix this? Thanks.
Hi Allan, Thank you for your excellent in-depth post and also your offer to help Smugmug to rectify this problem.
Dear Smugmug, this issue, once again seems to have fallen by the wayside. As you can see, Smugmug users have invested a huge amount of time in trying to illustrate this problem and suggest fixes. Are you able to give us any updates on what steps are being taken to fix this? Thanks.
Hi Shrekie,
I think SmugMug hope those of us who post on this subject will just give up and shut up, and allow the subject to be consigned to the trash while other features are launched. Unfortunately for us the majority appear to be more interested in coupons, packages and a new pro lab for example, none of which really are of any benefit and advantage to those of us on other continents. We simply want to be found for who we are and our images. The small number of us who post are not a true indication of those affected and disadvantaged. There are also many other posts on this subject in threads outside of this one which dilute the apparent level of dissatisfaction over the issue.
I think SmugMug hope those of us who post on this subject will just give up and shut up, and allow the subject to be consigned to the trash
I'd think that you of all people, who've experienced personally the hands-on personal support, instantly, when you've emailed us, would know better than this
We don't roll this way, haven't for 7 years of being in business, don't plan on starting now.
I'm sorry you feel this way but we have a very long list of customer-requested enhancements. We prioritize them, and we get to them. Improving SEO is one item on the list and I've acknowledged that we're going to continue to try. I've acknowledged the posts in this thread. Why on earth would we foster a public forum, seeking input, then ignore it? That just doesn't make sense.
We're a small, bootstrapped company of 45 employees, doing the work of over a hundred, providing a service to hundreds of thousands of customers, caring for One-half Billion photographs and growing, and writing millions of dollars $$ of checks to our pros each year. We have no investors, no venture capitalists and we remain fiercely independent. We're growing tremendously, and hiring, despite a worldwide economic downturn.
Once again, thank you for the feedback, it's really important that we know how important this is to you. We beg and appreciate everyone's patience.
EDIT: We've made one change already, it's in development & test now, but it's attached to another feature, can't say when it'll release (but soon, I hope!)... and will help feed google more info. More on this soon.
With all due respect.......
With all due respect to my fellow SM members who are complaining about photo visibility in the search engines.....
1. I can assure you as I am a member 5 or 6 years running that SM not only is listening, that this will be improved any way it can be improved as soon as it can be improved.
2. for those who (cringe) are using language like SM doesn't care or SM will just sweep this under the rug....... you obviously do not know this company or it's people very well.
3. Your time right now is MUCH better spent getting your website / pages found in search results in search engines... mainly Google.
As I've said earlier in this post and I think one other....
IF you get your website found on the first page of Google for the RIGHT keywords, the end result will be targeted viewers VIEWING your targeted photos / pages. If that is your goal (and it's certainly attainable), concentrate on that NOW.
After all: IF
A = more viewers visit your website (using the right keywords to attract)
B = more people see your photos
Then A = B and B is what your goal is right... more people seeing your photos! In fact if you target your keywords right, you can get them direct links to your photos in SM.
So stop whining about what you can't do and start working hard at what you CAN do which in effect will get you the same resulting photo viewers.
Have a great day today and work on the SEO for your site, today!
IF you need a recommendation for someone to do this, I have someone.
I think SmugMug hope those of us who post on this subject will just give up and shut up, and allow the subject to be consigned to the trash while other features are launched. Unfortunately for us the majority appear to be more interested in coupons, packages and a new pro lab for example, none of which really are of any benefit and advantage to those of us on other continents. We simply want to be found for who we are and our images. The small number of us who post are not a true indication of those affected and disadvantaged. There are also many other posts on this subject in threads outside of this one which dilute the apparent level of dissatisfaction over the issue.
Caroline
Markjay
Canon AE1 - it was my first "real camera"
Canon 20D - no more film!
I apologize for the obvious offence and consider myself well and truly spanked for being a grumpy old **** first thing in the morning (in the UK).
I absolutely can never fault your customer service, Hero support etc. I support you guys whenever I feel you are getting a rough deal and you know how much I appreciate you, above all I admire the ethics of the company and individuals that both volunteer and are employed by SmugMug.
This morning when I posted I said what I felt, I apologize for being outspoken. I'm not knocking in anyway the changes and enhancements that you have made over the years I have had my account, its a fact that not too many of them benefit me (thats my problem not yours). So this morning I threw a hissy fit - waaaah why cant I have what I want ........., Now or yesterday. It was quite unreasonable of me, apologies again to all concerned. bow
We have hundreds of thousands - but how many have you heard from here on Dgrin?
Again, not saying we won't and can't improve (always can!) or that we're not watching and listening closely to the folks here on Dgrin (you included!) but we do have gobs of customers that write us all the time, tops in search results, making money, selling, collecting money from us. I know, because the Countess of Cash sends out $Millions each year to them.
I think it's fantastic that there are other Smugmug Pro users who have been getting tops in search results. We've posted in this thread asking for people who have had positive experiences to share with us here, although there don't seem to be many forthcoming. If you could send the invitation to these successful Smugmuggers and ask them to share how they have been getting their site and images on the top in search results, that would be hugely appreciated by everyone I think.
Thanks,
Nelson
P.S Markjay, with respect, I think if you read this thread in more detail, you'll find that you're missing the point as what you've said has been covered many times over already.
EDIT: We've made one change already, it's in development & test now, but it's attached to another feature, can't say when it'll release (but soon, I hope!)... and will help feed google more info. More on this soon.
Thanks Andy,
I hope this fix will include a solution to all "Duplicate meta descriptions" and "Duplicate title tags" as reported by Google's Webmaster Tools, and also a possibility to address an photo-page-URL without a galleryID inside SM as quoted by google at http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=114016:
Even if your image appears on several pages on your site, consider creating a standalone landing page for each image, where you can gather all its related information. If you do this, be sure to provide unique information - such as descriptive titles and captions - on each page.
I think that fixing the text search search issue is the key to solve the image search with Google and others.
1. Get more page titles - In "Site-wide Customization" delete your "Page Title"
your page titles will now look like "nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug
I did this 2 weeks ago and my visits from Google increased 20 times (from 1-2/week to about 40 a week). I'm sure this is because the gallery title and photo title is now a part of the page title.
Andy, I am olso testing your suggestion putting links on blogs etc and on a HTML-page: http://lichtenhansen.smugmug.com/Nature/adelie-gentoo-macaroni-penguin/7740000_enusv
, however when I write the URL with www instead of NickName like this: http:// www smugmug com/gallery/7740000_enusv all the formatting is gone. I hope there is a fix to this too, as a lot of SM's pages indexed in Google are referencing a www smugmug com and not a NickName smugmug com. I would not like any visitor to see this page like this.
Home Page Title Originally Posted by LichtenHansen 1. Get more page titles - In "Site-wide Customization" delete your "Page Title"
your page titles will now look like "nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug
Your home page title is now "LichtenHansen's photos- powered by SmugMug.
"SmugMug Photo Sharing. Your photos look better here." I do not get a customized page title like yours until I get into a gallery. Things seem to work with markweston.smugmug.com, but not www.markwestonphotography.com. Can you tell me what I have done incorrectly?
1. Get more page titles - In "Site-wide Customization" delete your "Page Title" your page titles will now look like "nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug
Your home page title is now "LichtenHansen's photos- powered by SmugMug. "SmugMug Photo Sharing. Your photos look better here." I do not get a customized page title like yours until I get into a gallery. Things seem to work with markweston.smugmug.com, but not www.markwestonphotography.com. Can you tell me what I have done incorrectly?
Hi Mark , Thanks, I haven’t been able to find a custom domain not using the "Page Title" until now.
Searching Google, I can see that all you pages have been indexed with the Page titles:
“Mark Weston Photography - Southern California - Event Photography” and
“Mark Weston Photography - Event, Party, Sport & Travel Photography”
(very nice homepage).
So I have to change the “ Get more page titles - In "Site-wide Customization" delete your "Page Title” rule.
If you have a NickName smugmug com domain your page titles will now look like this:
"nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug”
If you do have a www CustomDomain com your page titles will look like this:
For gallery pages: "nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug”
For all other pages incl. your home page: “SmugMug Photo Sharing. Your photos look better here”.
I will not recommend anyone with a Custom Domain to delete the Page title in Site-wide Customization when Smugmug have chosen to generate Page titles this way.
1. Only if you do NOT have a Custom Domain: Get more page titles - In "Site-wide Customization" delete your "Page Title"
your page titles will now look like "nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug
Mark, I am sorry for not having the possibility to check this out before with Custom Domain.
I do think, like many others before me, that Smugmug should change the way page titles are generated, and give us the possibility to override it.
Tell me how Smugmug creates the alt tag?
I've become fixated with learning more and more about this "findability stuff" and it's a good thing... learning is good :-)
I have been told that Smugmug creates an alt tag for each of our images. How is that alt tag generated and what might it look like or say?
For example let's say I have a photo with a.........
filename: red_rose.jpg
And in my "caption / keyword" I have the following caption
red rose in a vase
Which information is used in creating the SM alt tag for that image and what would the alt tag actually say?
What makes me curious about this is: I'd really like to know how effective that alt tag actually is and I don't think it's very much to ask....and I'm confident someone at SM is going to be forthcoming and explain it, for which I thank you in advance.
Markjay
Markjay
Canon AE1 - it was my first "real camera"
Canon 20D - no more film!
I've become fixated with learning more and more about this "findability stuff" and it's a good thing... learning is good :-)
I have been told that Smugmug creates an alt tag for each of our images. How is that alt tag generated and what might it look like or say?
For example let's say I have a photo with a.........
filename: red_rose.jpg
And in my "caption / keyword" I have the following caption
red rose in a vase
Which information is used in creating the SM alt tag for that image and what would the alt tag actually say?
What makes me curious about this is: I'd really like to know how effective that alt tag actually is and I don't think it's very much to ask....and I'm confident someone at SM is going to be forthcoming and explain it, for which I thank you in advance.
Markjay
I've installed the Web Developer Toolbar into Firefox and one of it's options is to Display Alt Images. Smugmug seems to using the caption for the alt tag.
Thank you!
THANK you.... I have web dev and didnt even realize there was a alt tag attribute feature. Now that I know that, my captions are likely too long!
From what I've read and learned so far, it appears an alt tag should really not be longer than 7 words. Another "expert" tells me to keep my alt tags at three words no more no less. I'm not sure which expert is right but it appears that a long alt tag / caption is not a good option.
I've installed the Web Developer Toolbar into Firefox and one of it's options is to Display Alt Images. Smugmug seems to using the caption for the alt tag.
Markjay
Canon AE1 - it was my first "real camera"
Canon 20D - no more film!
Hi Markjay,
Thanks for the information re number of words, certainly my captions are too longif this is the case. Do you have links to your sources please ? I've tried googling for this without much success :-(
It would also be really interesting to have a link to your site. I have been advised by an "expert" which has greatly improved visibilty of my site but hasn't appeared to improve the GIS results. How are you doing in this respect ?
THANK you.... I have web dev and didnt even realize there was a alt tag attribute feature. Now that I know that, my captions are likely too long!
From what I've read and learned so far, it appears an alt tag should really not be longer than 7 words. Another "expert" tells me to keep my alt tags at three words no more no less. I'm not sure which expert is right but it appears that a long alt tag / caption is not a good option.
Notice how he suggests the alt tag be formatted. I do not believe SM formats their alt tag this way. SM formats their alt tag with only alt=blah blah blah (whatever your caption says) which does in fact describe your image if you write your captions well. (an alt tags basic function). Someone from SM can correct me if I'm wrong about how SM alt tag appears / is formatted, but that's how it appears when I view it in Web dev.
The other experts who have advised me: one of them has a masters degree in computer science and actually teaches this "stuff" at college and has done SEO on hundreds and hundreds of websites.... with extreme success (though I can't afford her pricing lol) suggests no more than between 3 -7 words targeted words that describe an image in your alt tag.
I have also read from several sources who all agree, that the alt tag if written as a hyperlink is weighted the way a relevant link to your website is weighted. Here's the way an alt tag should appear: <*IMG SRC=*http://www.yourwebsitehere/photos/240366479_AxLkK-S-20.jpg* ALT=*your image description*>* Part of that link is from an image of mine, I substituted some of the code so the bots don't pick it up with this post and added the asterisks where a " should be except for the first and last asterisk which should not be there at all.
Regarding sales or no sales from your visitors:
increasing your number of viewers is great but without giving them something they want to see when they "get there' (to your website) and you have the right image, at the right price, at a time they want to buy.... you'll be getting just visitors. And there's nothing wrong with just getting visitors if you want people to come to your site and appreciate your work. For me I want a combination of appreciation... and sales. :-)
And let's not forget, not everyone who is looking for an image is even in the market to buy an image, some just want to look. Your images have to be a subject in demand. I'm learning that some of my images are not images that are much in demand and forced me to rethink what I'm putting up on my site and what my expectations should be for sales. In other words, a "reality check" :-)
Hi Markjay,
Thanks for the information re number of words, certainly my captions are too longif this is the case. Do you have links to your sources please ? I've tried googling for this without much success :-(
It would also be really interesting to have a link to your site. I have been advised by an "expert" which has greatly improved visibilty of my site but hasn't appeared to improve the GIS results. How are you doing in this respect ?
Caroline
Markjay
Canon AE1 - it was my first "real camera"
Canon 20D - no more film!
Thanks for an informative and interesting reply Markjay :-)
A nice simple explanation in the video too.
Maybe the next stage should be re-captioning some important (to each of us) images with more targeted words, no more than 7 :-), and see if this makes for any better results in GIS.
Personally I don't have any interest in making sales from my site, the complications of being in the UK are more hassle than I'm prepared to get involved with. Yes I know how to get around them but I choose not to do this.
I stress, I am happy now with my visibilty in a straightforward google/yahoo search - for example try 'mendip photographer' or 'mendip photos'. I want to receive enquiries about using my images from publishers etc so I can deal direct. Print sales are very much secondary now. I am getting those enquiries now and am very pleased, but my challenge is to get my images seen in GIS by people searching for something specific I know I can supply. GIS does find my images but not using what I consider appropriate search terms. I've tried and experimented with many different options and it is very frustrating. However, by picking up bits of information here and there I think I'm making some progress.
Findability questions
I've read as many previous posts as I could find on findability (SEO). All of these seem to be focused on the customer searching for a particular IMAGE keyword (flower, landscape, etc). I'm less interested in this than I am in getting people to find me with a more general search phrase, such as "fine art photography."
1. I've put this phrase in my bio and info text. Is there any other place I can put this phrase (and a few others) that may be hidden to viewers but noticeable by google and Yahoo that will improve my rankings?
2. I understand that having outside links to one's site improves rankings. Does anyone have any usefull tips on this (for example - I do have a blog and link to my site from my blog)?
3. Is there anything else I can do to get my site listed as high as possible with these phrases?
RE: Website Grader
I'm not suggesting in any way that you let this ONE tool make all your decisions for you, nor does it replace a full blown SEO campaign strategy for your website.
However, it can be an eye opener for some of you still new to SEO or wanting to see where your site might be "weak" or in need of some improvement to take you in the right direction.
It's really very easy to use, you just type in your website url in the form of www.yourwebsite.com click the button and it will give you a detailed analysis with some recommendations for improvement.
Try it, you might learn something that ends up being helpful
I am now wondering why in the hell did I leave Photoshelter?
Sorry for being very blunt, but I should have dug a little deeper and spent a whole lot more time reading within the DGrin forums about the ongoing, ... and ongoing, ... and ongoing gripes about SEO, coupons, stock, ... etc.
Some of these threads that I see have been going on for a couple of years now, and still, nothing has really been accomplished at all as far as I can tell.
At Photoshelter, members would speak up about their needs, the staff would listen, and the Photoshelter staff jumps on it.
Now, ... friends of mine over at Photoshelter report that quickly in the past couple of weeks, their SEO is suddenly so much better.
And, the very day that I pulled all of my work from PS and started uploading to SM, I get a call from Germany about one of my images to be used in a corporate deal in Germany, ... and that image was found through Google on Photoshelter.
Why am I kicking myself?
I guess I got a tad impatient with a few minor things.
Finally, ... many of you have been absolutely wonderful with your help in setting up what I have achieved with the site so far here at SM, ... and I appreciate that. I really do!
But, ... I have a business to run, and for the first time in a long long while, ... I think that I may have created a huge blunder!!
I do hope that the SM staff appreciates someone who is honest and calls it the way that he sees it!
Hi Michael,
First may I congratulate you on your site and some truly beautiful images :-)
I've just read your blog dated 30th March and you were obviously aware at that time of 'shortcomings' of Smugmug, you say that SEO is also the pits at Photoshelter. The link to the SEO Toolkit is excellent by the way, thank you for that :-)
I've posted several times in this thread and sometimes have been frustrated by the lack of response or changes not forthcoming, but at the end of the day if Smugmug doesn't deliver then we either put up and shut up or move on. From your blog it appears you had done some research and comparison between the two products and then made your choice, maybe you now think it was the wrong one, but then hindsight is a wonderful thing .................
At Photoshelter, members would speak up about their needs, the staff would listen, and the Photoshelter staff jumps on it.
And we do here, too. Though not as fast as some folks expect, but we do get there. The things you mention are in active, aggressive development right now.
I do hope that the SM staff appreciates someone who is honest and calls it the way that he sees it!
And we do here, too. Though not as fast as some folks expect, but we do get there. The things you mention are in active, aggressive development right now.We do, we do.
Comments
I see 583 images and I'd say "most" are on borealphoto.com and "some" are on blogs and forums.
As for the display page, I believe SM calls it "single image view" and that what it looks like for single image in several styles. I haven't done anything to make them look like that. I thought Google found them easier to index for the same reasons you stated. But note that some images do lead to Smugmug style. I often find the same image next to each other in GIS, one leading to a single page and the other leading to the Smugmug style gallery.
EDIT: For the record, I have 1030 photos uploaded. Some images in GIS show up twice (different sizes). Quite a few of my pics don't have captions and a quick scan of GIS result for my site tells me the bulk of those images aren't indexed. Caption your images!
borealphoto.smugmug.com
I would like to promote one of my photos on my blogs and other blogs. The photo is Black-browed albatrosses in mating ritual. Westpoint Island, Falkland Islands.
I also know that I have to reorganize my galleries soon, and this photo is likely to go to another gallery.
So how do I make a link to a photo in X-gallery so that will work no matter which gallery X it is in?
regards,
Allan - Very new dgrin beginner.
My site is: http://lichtenhansen.smugmug.com/
Panoramio: Spectacular photos on Google Earth
Google: Allan Hansen - fotograf og IT-nørd
Blogs: Photo and SEO news by LichtenHansen, Allan Hansen foto nyheder, Antarctica Travel
Homepage: Fotograf Allan Hansen, Unusual wildlife photos
I just wanted to follow up on this post and share an example of this actually working.
If you search on Google Image search for "Miami Florida Beach Wedding", one of the first results you'll come across is a long shot of a bride and groom standing on the beach facing right. This images is from a site I built that is at www.miami-florida-beach-wedding.com.
Using the techniques listed below, this image ranks #1 in Google Image Search.
Of course I freely admit this is too labor-intensive to do with hundreds of images, but it still proves a solid point!
Inspired by this thread and a video from Google's Peter Linsley about "Get up-to-date on Image Search":<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Video (15 min): http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/03/get-up-to-date-on-image-search.html
I asked myself:
How good is SM doing on Google Image Search (GIS)? And how good is the visitor experience with people coming from GIS?
<o:p></o:p>
I tried many different keywords (with between 500 and 999 hits in SM excellent search engine) and the word "caracara" turned up to be give about average result for SM. Thumbnails from SM are very unreliable in Google Image search. Most of them do not lead you to a caracara in SM (Google Earth files, Thumbnail from today’s popular etc). Thumbnails will not likely turn up in a any Google Image Search and that is good, especially for a visitor and also for SM, so I counted only images before the first Thumbnail.
<o:p></o:p>
I Have chosen to compare with Pbase because they also have an inside search engine which I could use, and Panoramio because it is owned by Google, so this gives an estimate of the practical percentage of images you can expect to see in GIS. (Just like Flickr images in Yahoo image search),
<o:p></o:p>
Images in SM: 783 and 100% accurate.
Images in GIS: 15 and 66% accurate. Typical res 400x268. 5 linking to a www-URL, 5 linking to a Nickname-URL and 5 photos not linking to a caracara in SM.
Note: SM removes the frame when clicking an image from GIS, which makes it impossible to hit the "Back" for continuing the image search. This is really annoying.
Verdict for SM: 1.91% of images in GIS with poor resolution - and a bad user experience.
<o:p></o:p>
to comparison: result for Pbase:
Images in Pbase: 1408 - 100% accurate
Images in GIS: 223 - 100% accurate. Typical res 800x500
Verdict for Pbase: 15.83% of images in GIS with medium resolution - and a very good user experience.
<o:p></o:p>
to comparison with my images in panoramio which are not in my SM galleries: <o:p></o:p>
Images in panoramio : 44
Images in GIS: 23 - 100% accurate. typical res 1100x800
Verdict for Panoramio(alone): 52.27% of images in GIS with original resolution - and a very good user experience.
(Theese photos do not exists anywhere else on the internet)
<o:p></o:p>
to comparison with my images in panoramio which are also in my SM galleries: <o:p></o:p>
Images in panoramio : 36
Images in GIS: 7 - 100% accurate. typical res 1100x800
Verdict for Panoramio(+SM): 19.44% of images in GIS -with original resolution and a very good user experience.
(I cannot give an explanation to this - GIS might find similar images in SM and regard them as dublicates or ????)
(I have moved half of these images to a gallery not seen by SM or Google to see if this will make a difference. The weeks to come will tell)
<o:p></o:p>
So why is SM doing so badly in GIS?
<o:p></o:p>
Listen to the Video again: It is all about the user experience. GIS would not be used if all image searches were like searching for SM's photos in Google.
<o:p></o:p>
SM's biggest problem is the URL's to the pages with photos. All photos have a lot of URL's. Following examples show only a few of them:
www.smugmug.com/gallery/xxxxxxx-yyyy (usually the first photo in a gallery, photo is different if you add og rearrange or move)
and nickname.smugmug.com/gallery/xxxxxxx-yyyy or www.CustumDomain.com/gallery/xxxxxxx-yyyy
www.smugmug.com/gallery/xxxxxxx-yyyy/1/zzzzzzz-qqqq (photo is different if you move photo to another gallery)
www.smugmug.com/gallery/xxxxxxx-yyyy/2/zzzzzzz-qqqq (photo is different if you move photo to another gallery)
www.smugmug.com/gallery/xxxxxxx-yyyy/1/zzzzzzz-qqqq/Large (photo is different if you move photo to another gallery)
www.smugmug.com/gallery/xxxxxxx-yyyy/1/zzzzzzz-qqqq/Small (photo is different if you move photo to another gallery)
www.smugmug.com/gallerycommunity/Birds/keyword/caracara (photo can different the next day)
www.smugmug.com/community/Birds/popular/today (photo is different the next day)
www.smugmug.com/community/Birds/popular/today/1/zzzzzzz-qqqq (photo is different the next day)
www.smugmug.com/popular/today/9/zzzzzzz-qqqq (photo is different the next day)
and I could go on and on and on.
<o:p></o:p>
All with more or less the same content. Many of them with the same title, and all of them a different page-URL. A major no-no according to Google:
http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35769
<o:p></o:p>
The 8 photos from SM actually being indexed in GIS ware either the only photo in a gallery or (my guess) had been no 1 in a "most popular" gallery for a while.
Half of them - especially those with highest rating - have a page title like: nickname: photos: Galleryname (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug
<o:p></o:p>
Search engines base their logic on 20+ different parameters. Among the most important - if not the most important - is the page title and then the text (alt= for an image). This is what is everyone says, and this is the information shown to users of search engines.
<o:p></o:p>
GIS do find SM photos, but they find the same photo again and again on different pages, some disappear again, some have another image, and they all have more or less the same content and page title.
<o:p></o:p>
So how can we SM-users even hope to get a better percentage of our photos in GIS?
<o:p></o:p>
You as an SM-user can do this now:<o:p></o:p>
your page titles will now look like "nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug
2. Make more galleries - with a descriptive name and description - and add only one photo at a time. Wait until your image is indexed with GIS on an URL like nickname.smugmug.com/gallery/xxxxxxx-yyyy/1/zzzzzzz-qqqq/Original - (Blog entries will speed of this process - Andy has to some degree successfully done this). Then add another photo in position 1 - wait again - and so on.
3. Make sure to add caption and keywords to your images
4. If your Image is found and indexed by GIS in a good quality - do NOT move it to another gallery.
5 If you promote your photos on blogs or other places - do NOT move to another gallery – The image link will be invalidated and reference another image (The first photo in that gallery)
6? Both pro’s and con’s. For those of you having a Custom navbar.
A lot of your visitors from Google will enter your homepage on a www.smugmug.com URL. Your homepage customization will be gone unless you gallery is in a community (and pick a gallery that will allow your customization to be visible). Be sure to add an absolute path to navbar if the URL is not pointing to a gallery or "/popular" will then reference "www.smugmug.com/popular" and that is SM's main page and not you popular photos. Adding your gallery will add a lot of redundant URL’s to your pages and more visitors entering your galleries from Google will end up on a www-URL instead of your Nickname-URL. A better workaround might be to disable SM search for your galleries, and make sure you are not on any of the SM and communities popular galleries. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I have already done no 1, 3 and I am testing no 2. And with great success (for a beginner SM like me): Before: 1 or 2 visit from Google text search a week. Now 24 hours later - 5 visits from Google in a day and Google have so far only indexed a few of these pages. GIS will take much longer - weeks or months.
<o:p></o:p>
SM can do this - and this is by far the best solution:<o:p></o:p>
2. Change the page-title to the relevant image caption no matter what gallery the image is in.
for nickname.smugmug.com/gallery/zzzzzzz-xxxxxxx-yyyy(gallery-id) use the gallery caption.
for nickname.smugmug.com/community/Birds add an informative text like "Photo gallery of birds".
and so on
and Change the META text, keywords and h1-4 captions on a page or feed to follow the same rule.
3. Do not let GIS index www.smugmug.com URL's, or make sure that the same page do not have different URL's.
4. Let the default image size be Original like you already do in www.smugmug.com/gallery/xxxxxxx-yyyy/1/zzzzzzz-qqqq/Origin al type of pages. Google search engines will see the big size image in the page and you will change it to Large/Medium/Small before is it sent to the user. (Image sizes and quality are important factors in GIS)
5?. Give SM-users better control over their page titles: about "powered by SmugMug" I do not know.
"take off (juvenile Northern Caracara)" is better than "savingflorida: photos: take off (juvenile Northern Caracara)"
First word in title is very important: If your name is "David Attenborough" it might be OK to use as the first words in the title.
6?. Implement image file name for those who really want it. It is not important compared to Page title, Captions and Meta description. Changing an image file name might make I it necessary for GIS to start all over for an image.
7. These changes will also make it easy to implement virtual galleries as requested by many SM-users.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Please contact me if I can be of any help regarding this search issue. I will be glad to help. (I am an experienced IT-professional with focus on problem solving and testing.).
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Conclusion:<o:p></o:p>
Please, Please, Please SM, Please do something about this search issue very soon.
Please, Please, Please SM, Please give us an estimate. This discussion has taken place for a long, long time.
Please, Please, Please SM, Please consider this to be the most important issue for the time being.
<o:p></o:p>
Thanks
Allan from Denmark<o:p></o:p>
SM Home: http://lichtenhansen.smugmug.com/
Panoramio home: http://www.panoramio.com/user/2512952
Still a big fan of SM. Once you are inside SM, it is really fantastic. <o:p></o:p>
Panoramio: Spectacular photos on Google Earth
Google: Allan Hansen - fotograf og IT-nørd
Blogs: Photo and SEO news by LichtenHansen, Allan Hansen foto nyheder, Antarctica Travel
Homepage: Fotograf Allan Hansen, Unusual wildlife photos
Thanks so much for taking the time to write out that post. I hope it lights a fire under their butts!
Sebastian
SmugMug Support Hero
That was a mouthful! lol
You've spent quite a bit of time on this I see.
Tell me an answer to this one question:
Which is easier to accomplish?
A. get your website found in Google
B. get your images (SM) found in Google?
I think the answer is A
If the answer is A..... does it follow that.....
A = B ?
OMG I sound like a math class! lol
Seriously.... I have had MUCH more success getting my pages / website on Google page 1 than my images. But... if getting my website on Google first page gets me viewers viewing my images.......
isn't that what we are trying to accomplish anyway?
Have a great day!
Markjay
Canon AE1 - it was my first "real camera"
Canon 20D - no more film!
Dear Smugmug, this issue, once again seems to have fallen by the wayside. As you can see, Smugmug users have invested a huge amount of time in trying to illustrate this problem and suggest fixes. Are you able to give us any updates on what steps are being taken to fix this? Thanks.
Website: www.lookingglassphotography.com.au
Blog: http://lookingglassphotography.posterous.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LookingGlassPho
Hi Shrekie,
I think SmugMug hope those of us who post on this subject will just give up and shut up, and allow the subject to be consigned to the trash while other features are launched. Unfortunately for us the majority appear to be more interested in coupons, packages and a new pro lab for example, none of which really are of any benefit and advantage to those of us on other continents. We simply want to be found for who we are and our images. The small number of us who post are not a true indication of those affected and disadvantaged. There are also many other posts on this subject in threads outside of this one which dilute the apparent level of dissatisfaction over the issue.
Caroline
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
I'd think that you of all people, who've experienced personally the hands-on personal support, instantly, when you've emailed us, would know better than this
We don't roll this way, haven't for 7 years of being in business, don't plan on starting now.
I'm sorry you feel this way but we have a very long list of customer-requested enhancements. We prioritize them, and we get to them. Improving SEO is one item on the list and I've acknowledged that we're going to continue to try. I've acknowledged the posts in this thread. Why on earth would we foster a public forum, seeking input, then ignore it? That just doesn't make sense.
We're a small, bootstrapped company of 45 employees, doing the work of over a hundred, providing a service to hundreds of thousands of customers, caring for One-half Billion photographs and growing, and writing millions of dollars $$ of checks to our pros each year. We have no investors, no venture capitalists and we remain fiercely independent. We're growing tremendously, and hiring, despite a worldwide economic downturn.
Once again, thank you for the feedback, it's really important that we know how important this is to you. We beg and appreciate everyone's patience.
EDIT: We've made one change already, it's in development & test now, but it's attached to another feature, can't say when it'll release (but soon, I hope!)... and will help feed google more info. More on this soon.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
With all due respect to my fellow SM members who are complaining about photo visibility in the search engines.....
1. I can assure you as I am a member 5 or 6 years running that SM not only is listening, that this will be improved any way it can be improved as soon as it can be improved.
2. for those who (cringe) are using language like SM doesn't care or SM will just sweep this under the rug....... you obviously do not know this company or it's people very well.
3. Your time right now is MUCH better spent getting your website / pages found in search results in search engines... mainly Google.
As I've said earlier in this post and I think one other....
IF you get your website found on the first page of Google for the RIGHT keywords, the end result will be targeted viewers VIEWING your targeted photos / pages. If that is your goal (and it's certainly attainable), concentrate on that NOW.
After all: IF
A = more viewers visit your website (using the right keywords to attract)
B = more people see your photos
Then A = B and B is what your goal is right... more people seeing your photos! In fact if you target your keywords right, you can get them direct links to your photos in SM.
So stop whining about what you can't do and start working hard at what you CAN do which in effect will get you the same resulting photo viewers.
Have a great day today and work on the SEO for your site, today!
IF you need a recommendation for someone to do this, I have someone.
Markjay
Canon AE1 - it was my first "real camera"
Canon 20D - no more film!
I apologize for the obvious offence and consider myself well and truly spanked for being a grumpy old **** first thing in the morning (in the UK).
I absolutely can never fault your customer service, Hero support etc. I support you guys whenever I feel you are getting a rough deal and you know how much I appreciate you, above all I admire the ethics of the company and individuals that both volunteer and are employed by SmugMug.
This morning when I posted I said what I felt, I apologize for being outspoken. I'm not knocking in anyway the changes and enhancements that you have made over the years I have had my account, its a fact that not too many of them benefit me (thats my problem not yours). So this morning I threw a hissy fit - waaaah why cant I have what I want ........., Now or yesterday. It was quite unreasonable of me, apologies again to all concerned.
Caroline (suitably chastened)
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
This is from a comment you wrote on another thread:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=1075789#post1075789
I think it's fantastic that there are other Smugmug Pro users who have been getting tops in search results. We've posted in this thread asking for people who have had positive experiences to share with us here, although there don't seem to be many forthcoming. If you could send the invitation to these successful Smugmuggers and ask them to share how they have been getting their site and images on the top in search results, that would be hugely appreciated by everyone I think.
Thanks,
Nelson
P.S Markjay, with respect, I think if you read this thread in more detail, you'll find that you're missing the point as what you've said has been covered many times over already.
Website: www.lookingglassphotography.com.au
Blog: http://lookingglassphotography.posterous.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LookingGlassPho
I hope this fix will include a solution to all "Duplicate meta descriptions" and "Duplicate title tags" as reported by Google's Webmaster Tools, and also a possibility to address an photo-page-URL without a galleryID inside SM as quoted by google at http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=114016: I think that fixing the text search search issue is the key to solve the image search with Google and others.
I did this 2 weeks ago and my visits from Google increased 20 times (from 1-2/week to about 40 a week). I'm sure this is because the gallery title and photo title is now a part of the page title.
Andy, I am olso testing your suggestion putting links on blogs etc and on a HTML-page: http://lichtenhansen.smugmug.com/Nature/adelie-gentoo-macaroni-penguin/7740000_enusv
, however when I write the URL with www instead of NickName like this: http:// www smugmug com/gallery/7740000_enusv all the formatting is gone. I hope there is a fix to this too, as a lot of SM's pages indexed in Google are referencing a www smugmug com and not a NickName smugmug com. I would not like any visitor to see this page like this.
Panoramio: Spectacular photos on Google Earth
Google: Allan Hansen - fotograf og IT-nørd
Blogs: Photo and SEO news by LichtenHansen, Allan Hansen foto nyheder, Antarctica Travel
Homepage: Fotograf Allan Hansen, Unusual wildlife photos
Originally Posted by LichtenHansen
1. Get more page titles - In "Site-wide Customization" delete your "Page Title"
your page titles will now look like "nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug
Your home page title is now "LichtenHansen's photos- powered by SmugMug.
"SmugMug Photo Sharing. Your photos look better here." I do not get a customized page title like yours until I get into a gallery. Things seem to work with markweston.smugmug.com, but not www.markwestonphotography.com. Can you tell me what I have done incorrectly?
my website is www.markwestonphotography.com
Thank you,
Mark
weston.photos
Hi Mark , Thanks, I haven’t been able to find a custom domain not using the "Page Title" until now.
Searching Google, I can see that all you pages have been indexed with the Page titles:
“Mark Weston Photography - Southern California - Event Photography” and
“Mark Weston Photography - Event, Party, Sport & Travel Photography”
(very nice homepage).
So I have to change the “ Get more page titles - In "Site-wide Customization" delete your "Page Title” rule.
If you have a NickName smugmug com domain your page titles will now look like this:
"nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug”
If you do have a www CustomDomain com your page titles will look like this:
For gallery pages: "nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug”
For all other pages incl. your home page: “SmugMug Photo Sharing. Your photos look better here”.
I will not recommend anyone with a Custom Domain to delete the Page title in Site-wide Customization when Smugmug have chosen to generate Page titles this way.
1. Only if you do NOT have a Custom Domain: Get more page titles - In "Site-wide Customization" delete your "Page Title"
your page titles will now look like "nickname: photos: GalleryName (and some: image title) powered by SmugMug
Mark, I am sorry for not having the possibility to check this out before with Custom Domain.
I do think, like many others before me, that Smugmug should change the way page titles are generated, and give us the possibility to override it.
Panoramio: Spectacular photos on Google Earth
Google: Allan Hansen - fotograf og IT-nørd
Blogs: Photo and SEO news by LichtenHansen, Allan Hansen foto nyheder, Antarctica Travel
Homepage: Fotograf Allan Hansen, Unusual wildlife photos
I've become fixated with learning more and more about this "findability stuff" and it's a good thing... learning is good :-)
I have been told that Smugmug creates an alt tag for each of our images. How is that alt tag generated and what might it look like or say?
For example let's say I have a photo with a.........
filename: red_rose.jpg
And in my "caption / keyword" I have the following caption
red rose in a vase
Which information is used in creating the SM alt tag for that image and what would the alt tag actually say?
What makes me curious about this is: I'd really like to know how effective that alt tag actually is and I don't think it's very much to ask....and I'm confident someone at SM is going to be forthcoming and explain it, for which I thank you in advance.
Markjay
Canon AE1 - it was my first "real camera"
Canon 20D - no more film!
I've installed the Web Developer Toolbar into Firefox and one of it's options is to Display Alt Images. Smugmug seems to using the caption for the alt tag.
Tickled Pixels
Tickled Pixels Blog: "A walk in Gamla stan, the old town of Stockholm"
THANK you.... I have web dev and didnt even realize there was a alt tag attribute feature. Now that I know that, my captions are likely too long!
From what I've read and learned so far, it appears an alt tag should really not be longer than 7 words. Another "expert" tells me to keep my alt tags at three words no more no less. I'm not sure which expert is right but it appears that a long alt tag / caption is not a good option.
Markjay
Canon AE1 - it was my first "real camera"
Canon 20D - no more film!
Thanks for the information re number of words, certainly my captions are too longif this is the case. Do you have links to your sources please ? I've tried googling for this without much success :-(
It would also be really interesting to have a link to your site. I have been advised by an "expert" which has greatly improved visibilty of my site but hasn't appeared to improve the GIS results. How are you doing in this respect ?
Caroline
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
Here's what I have learned about the importance of alt tags, Caroline.
Matt Cutts, the head of Google's webspam team, provides some useful tips on how to optimize the images you include on your site:
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/12/using-alt-attributes-smartly.html. Most of this is pretty simplistic talk but, the alt tag formtting is what he's discussing overall.
Notice how he suggests the alt tag be formatted. I do not believe SM formats their alt tag this way. SM formats their alt tag with only alt=blah blah blah (whatever your caption says) which does in fact describe your image if you write your captions well. (an alt tags basic function). Someone from SM can correct me if I'm wrong about how SM alt tag appears / is formatted, but that's how it appears when I view it in Web dev.
The other experts who have advised me: one of them has a masters degree in computer science and actually teaches this "stuff" at college and has done SEO on hundreds and hundreds of websites.... with extreme success (though I can't afford her pricing lol) suggests no more than between 3 -7 words targeted words that describe an image in your alt tag.
I have also read from several sources who all agree, that the alt tag if written as a hyperlink is weighted the way a relevant link to your website is weighted. Here's the way an alt tag should appear: <*IMG SRC=*http://www.yourwebsitehere/photos/240366479_AxLkK-S-20.jpg* ALT=*your image description*>* Part of that link is from an image of mine, I substituted some of the code so the bots don't pick it up with this post and added the asterisks where a " should be except for the first and last asterisk which should not be there at all.
Regarding sales or no sales from your visitors:
increasing your number of viewers is great but without giving them something they want to see when they "get there' (to your website) and you have the right image, at the right price, at a time they want to buy.... you'll be getting just visitors. And there's nothing wrong with just getting visitors if you want people to come to your site and appreciate your work. For me I want a combination of appreciation... and sales. :-)
And let's not forget, not everyone who is looking for an image is even in the market to buy an image, some just want to look. Your images have to be a subject in demand. I'm learning that some of my images are not images that are much in demand and forced me to rethink what I'm putting up on my site and what my expectations should be for sales. In other words, a "reality check" :-)
I sincerely hope that helps you some, Caroline?
Markjay
Canon AE1 - it was my first "real camera"
Canon 20D - no more film!
A nice simple explanation in the video too.
Maybe the next stage should be re-captioning some important (to each of us) images with more targeted words, no more than 7 :-), and see if this makes for any better results in GIS.
Personally I don't have any interest in making sales from my site, the complications of being in the UK are more hassle than I'm prepared to get involved with. Yes I know how to get around them but I choose not to do this.
I stress, I am happy now with my visibilty in a straightforward google/yahoo search - for example try 'mendip photographer' or 'mendip photos'. I want to receive enquiries about using my images from publishers etc so I can deal direct. Print sales are very much secondary now. I am getting those enquiries now and am very pleased, but my challenge is to get my images seen in GIS by people searching for something specific I know I can supply. GIS does find my images but not using what I consider appropriate search terms. I've tried and experimented with many different options and it is very frustrating. However, by picking up bits of information here and there I think I'm making some progress.
Thanks for you input.
Caroline
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
I've read as many previous posts as I could find on findability (SEO). All of these seem to be focused on the customer searching for a particular IMAGE keyword (flower, landscape, etc). I'm less interested in this than I am in getting people to find me with a more general search phrase, such as "fine art photography."
1. I've put this phrase in my bio and info text. Is there any other place I can put this phrase (and a few others) that may be hidden to viewers but noticeable by google and Yahoo that will improve my rankings?
2. I understand that having outside links to one's site improves rankings. Does anyone have any usefull tips on this (for example - I do have a blog and link to my site from my blog)?
3. Is there anything else I can do to get my site listed as high as possible with these phrases?
Thanks in advance,
Steven Keller
www.kellerphotographic.com
If you haven't, that would be a good place to start.
--- Denise
Musings & ramblings at https://denisegoldberg.blogspot.com
I'm not suggesting in any way that you let this ONE tool make all your decisions for you, nor does it replace a full blown SEO campaign strategy for your website.
However, it can be an eye opener for some of you still new to SEO or wanting to see where your site might be "weak" or in need of some improvement to take you in the right direction.
It's really very easy to use, you just type in your website url in the form of www.yourwebsite.com click the button and it will give you a detailed analysis with some recommendations for improvement.
Try it, you might learn something that ends up being helpful
http://website.grader.com/Default.aspx
Markjay
Canon AE1 - it was my first "real camera"
Canon 20D - no more film!
SEO for Photography Websites: Free Toolkit
http://pa.photoshelter.com/mkt/seo-kit-for-photographers
I am now wondering why in the hell did I leave Photoshelter?
Sorry for being very blunt, but I should have dug a little deeper and spent a whole lot more time reading within the DGrin forums about the ongoing, ... and ongoing, ... and ongoing gripes about SEO, coupons, stock, ... etc.
Some of these threads that I see have been going on for a couple of years now, and still, nothing has really been accomplished at all as far as I can tell.
At Photoshelter, members would speak up about their needs, the staff would listen, and the Photoshelter staff jumps on it.
Now, ... friends of mine over at Photoshelter report that quickly in the past couple of weeks, their SEO is suddenly so much better.
And, the very day that I pulled all of my work from PS and started uploading to SM, I get a call from Germany about one of my images to be used in a corporate deal in Germany, ... and that image was found through Google on Photoshelter.
Why am I kicking myself?
I guess I got a tad impatient with a few minor things.
Finally, ... many of you have been absolutely wonderful with your help in setting up what I have achieved with the site so far here at SM, ... and I appreciate that. I really do!
But, ... I have a business to run, and for the first time in a long long while, ... I think that I may have created a huge blunder!!
I do hope that the SM staff appreciates someone who is honest and calls it the way that he sees it!
Michael
First may I congratulate you on your site and some truly beautiful images :-)
I've just read your blog dated 30th March and you were obviously aware at that time of 'shortcomings' of Smugmug, you say that SEO is also the pits at Photoshelter. The link to the SEO Toolkit is excellent by the way, thank you for that :-)
I've posted several times in this thread and sometimes have been frustrated by the lack of response or changes not forthcoming, but at the end of the day if Smugmug doesn't deliver then we either put up and shut up or move on. From your blog it appears you had done some research and comparison between the two products and then made your choice, maybe you now think it was the wrong one, but then hindsight is a wonderful thing .................
With sympathy,
Caroline
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I agree wholeheartedly Andy, you do :-)
Caroline
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]