Like now, the page title shows Moezel, Germany - Photo galleries blabla
But if it would show Moezel, Germany - Porta Nigra, Trier - Photo galleries blabla....
I've read that page titles are very important for Google. So wouldn't this be a good idea to get higher results in the search engines ? (i'm just thinking that if someone types Germany Porta Nigra photo in Google search, that my site could show up in first xx pages)
I have mentioned this before, but got no response. Google is indexing other people SmugMug sites as part of my custom hostname. Do a google search, site:www.uwencounters.com. You will see /prints/ceramic-tile-photo-mosaic and /community/5DMarkIIVideo and on and on.
I don't think you can do anything, we have a better handle on this now and we'll do what we can.
Yeah, that's nice, except that I just set up my entire site hierarchy assuming the title set up they were using before. Now, my titles are missing basically every important keyword I need (which I put in category names, which are no longer in the title at all)
MAKE UP YOUR MIND, or give us complete title control. I've just fixed my names, again, and nows it's better, yes. But please settle on a format. I don't have time to rename things on a daily basis.
We don't change things willy nilly. This was a long time coming and your SEO should vastly improve.
If the photos are keyword-ed well, but they are not displayed to the public, would that still be effective? Or would that be the same as them not being there.
I guess the same question could be asked for gallery description if it is not displayed. I think this one should be fine since it is only the css that is not displaying it but it is still in the html, right?
Using Menu Link Titles
I have searched Google for an answer to my question without finding a definite answer. Does someone know if using title tags on menu anchor links have a positive influence on Google's search engine and 'findability' or is it just superfluous info? My inquiring mind wants to know. Thank you to that someone who may have the answer.
I have searched Google for an answer to my question without finding a definite answer. Does someone know if using title tags on menu anchor links have a positive influence on Google's search engine and 'findability' or is it just superfluous info? My inquiring mind wants to know. Thank you to that someone who may have the answer.
I haven't gotten a definitive answer, but I add stuff there anyhow.
After doing some more checking, I believe it has very little or zero value for optimization. Title tags ought to be used for humans as intended, not for search robots. So I will remove mine from my menu links to reduce visual clutter. They were not providing any additional information than what can be seen anyway.
After doing some more checking, I believe it has very little or zero value for optimization. Title tags ought to be used for humans as intended, not for search robots. So I will remove mine from my menu links to reduce visual clutter. They were not providing any additional information than what can be seen anyway.
Eliminating the tags made a big difference in usability.
No but we have other plans, for filenames, and sitemaps, for the future.
Stay tuned.
welcome!
Andy, from checking search results in Google Images, i couldn't find any Image NAME as a referral to the keywords i used for searching. EVERYTHING was based either on keywords found in the caption or in the text surrounding the image. I still think that a meaningful image name helps (and will appreciate SmugMug working on managing those), but would like to hear your opinion.
Also (and more important), i don't think Google sees/indexes my Captions, nor my Keywords; any insights?...
Search Engine Optimization: Google Descriptions
Hi, I have added a title to my site and it looks like that information has been picked up by google. However, the description information on the results pages isn't gibberish or smugmug site information. How do I update the description?
Hi, I have added a title to my site and it looks like that information has been picked up by google. However, the description information on the results pages isn't gibberish or smugmug site information. How do I update the description?
I love Smugmug but always felt that SEO was the weak point with the service.
I haven't paid attention to the forums in over a month, but I'm glad to see that this is now a priority at the highest levels and the important things (file naming and sitemaps) are in the works.
Prior to Smugmug I attempted a self hosted solution with Gallery2 just to improve my image search SEO and it was a dismal failure.
2014 Travel Photographer of the Year, Society of American Travel Writers
2013 & 2015 Travel Photographer of the Year, North American Travel Journalists Association
Very interesting thread!
I am about half way through reading it all so far
I have set up flickr, picasa, wordpress and blogspot pages.
But I am wondering if so many websites with the same content, key words etc pointing to my smugmug is good, or is too much of the same not so good??
You can never have too many links pointing towards your website, unless you're "farming links". Basically, do a blog because you want to do a blog, not because you want links. Directories are a another way of geting links. They don't weigh much but they don't hurt.
A problem could be that your blogs, flickr, etc do better than your Smugmug site. No matter how good SM gets at SEO, it's your little URL against giants like Flickr and Pbase.
Bravo to Smugmug for the change in title and url. Better SEO and no need for that cosmetic JS hack anymore. I'd prefer "Borealphoto.com" over Borealphoto's photos" though.
A few random things...
- It may be a good idea to use the old url scheme for links (replacing the text part with /gallery/) in case you change gallery name.
- Did you also remove the Smugblurb in the description? I rarely see it anymore. Bravo again.
- The findability page is a bit flawed. Too much emphasis on keywords and not enough on captions. Captions are also used as alt and title tags. VERY important so fill your captions.
- We can't see it when browsing, but there IS a title tag for each image in Smugmug view. I don't know how SM does that. There is also a single page with its own title for each image. This was true before the change BTW.
I'd prefer "Borealphoto.com" over Borealphoto's photos" though.
Hi Erick, i'm sorry to write this so late. You do have the capability to put "Borealphoto.com" or whatever you want in the Title of your Home page. You do it through the Advance Customization's 'Page Title' option. What you put there will even override the "-Powered by SmugMug" (unless you want it, and can add it yourself).
- We can't see it when browsing, but there IS a title tag for each image in Smugmug view. I don't know how SM does that.
Googlebot sees no ajax, so we give him his own version of the page, non-ajaxed (like the old SmugMug from a few years ago). Then Googlebot sees all that stuff
Hi Erick, i'm sorry to write this so late. You do have the capability to put "Borealphoto.com" or whatever you want in the Title of your Home page. You do it through the Advance Customization's 'Page Title' option. What you put there will even override the "-Powered by SmugMug" (unless you want it, and can add it yourself).
Thanks. This used to put the same title on every pages so I left it empty. I see that changed as well and it's good.
The basics which Andy is always preaching certainly work in most cases. One of the reasons why your site will rank high on Google is because SmugMug ranks highly. And to do that, you trade some of your SEO benefits to SmugMug, on the theory that a rising tide lifts all ships. A half million users on a site trading a fraction of their SEO capabilities to make the site stronger in search results, is going to lift your site in ways that a standalone site might never attain.
And as Andy and others have said here, you need more than tags, image titles, et al in order to reach the top of competitive search phrases.
A case in point ... I do a search for Old Bethpage Village photos, and links to my blog site comes up at number one for the text results. The images there link back to my SmugMug site, along with the phrase "to buy prints."
A secondary blog I created holds the number two spot, with the same captions and links.
Blogs are going to place higher here because they contain text, which also contain the keywords and many other related keywords. Google has lousy taste in art. It can't see photos, only words. So words will always hold more weight. The more keyword dense copy, the higher the ranking
My SmugMug site is number eight on the listings, still on the first page so perfectly respectable there. It's brought to the first page by inbound links, and by SmugMug's high ranking.
Neither my SmugMug nor blog site shows in the image results however. But that doesn't really matter to me. Someone searching to buy a print is more likely to do so from the text listings than to wade through the images. People searching images are more likely just looking at photos, or worse yet, printing them from their own printers. My first page results says at the top "prints," so they know up front that I'm selling prints.
I do have photos in the image results however, from my Flickr site. And each photo there links back to my SmugMug site through a link in the caption. This used to give me added lift in search results, before Flickr started adding "do not follow" codes to links back to commercial sites. But my Flickr site does drive a considerable amount of traffic to my SmugMug site. I do this with the link, and also by keeping the image sizes small on Flickr, forcing the viewer to the SmugMug site to view larger. And my photos on Flickr bring in a lot of traffic from search results as well.
Yes, it's another step to post photos to Flickr as well as SmugMug. I also sometime post to Picassa as too. But that's a workflow issue. It takes me about thirty seconds to post photos to any of these sites. I'm willing to invest a minute per photo to drive more traffic to my site.
The point is, there is no single thing you can do to lift your site to the top of the search engines. Sometimes you might get lucky, sometimes there isn't much competition for the search phrase, but usually it requires selecting the right keywords and having a multi-pronged approach. Google changes its algorithm frequently, as do the other search engines. Having several strategies keeps you from getting whacked when suddenly your SEO strategy is downgraded by an algorithm change.
SmugMug does a good job of covering the basics and sure, they could do even more. And I'm betting they will. But if you want to compete against heavily competitive keywords and phrases, you have to go the extra mile.
...SmugMug does a good job of covering the basics and sure, they could do even more. And I'm betting they will. But if you want to compete against heavily competitive keywords and phrases, you have to go the extra mile.
Hello Todd (and everyone),
I wanted to post here anyway but after reading your very informative and very true message, i want to reply and also ask you a few questions. (maybe i'll also get some answers from SmugMug...)
SmugMug might do a good job for lifting its own and its members' relevance/rating in the eyes of search engines (in regard to photos in general and online galleries). But i don't need people to reach ME, i want them to find and reach what they are searching for (the search keyword phrase they insert).
I think i'm getting traffic in spite of SmugMug! Another words, people reach a certain gallery of mine according to their keyword (¨aerial photos of Southampton ny¨, for example). I'm not sure SmugMug helps me at all; as a matter of fact i didn't find myself on the first Google results page, but i did find a link to FOTOSEARCH.com (to one of their members).!!!!!??????
I have other website which i fully control and can see the difference (but to be honest, it might be that i'm fairly new in SmugMug).
Even though all my images have captions, none is found on Google Images. The same applies to my keywords in SmugMug - search engines don't see them (in spite of SmugMug stressing their importance)!!
Another thing, SmugMug claims special relationship with their neighbor Google, how come i get more visitors through BING!????
Todd, i have Flicker and Picassa on my 'to do list', but was waiting to finish my site here first; do you still recommend them (and/or others) as a worthwhile (and effective) source for additional visits and Rating?
Todd, i have Flicker and Picassa on my 'to do list', but was waiting to finish my site here first; do you still recommend them (and/or others) as a worthwhile (and effective) source for additional visits and Rating?
Thanks for your time spent reading the above.
Flickr seems to be dead for me now. They put "do not follow" codes on all links, and I even got an email asking me to remove all links to my commercial site from Flickr photos, though I haven't heard of a lot of others being told the same thing. I'm thinking they might have a bit of sour grapes towards SmugMug sites.
Any social media site, be it Flickr, Picassa, MySpace, Facebook et al can be used to drive traffic to your site, but they all require a bit of effort to get the traffic flowing. The trick is not to rely on any one element to drive your traffic - be it google or social media. Eventually something changes and you find yourself back to square one. If you're diversified enough, you don't suffer much when one stream dries up.
I read a few responses to that blog post elsewhere, but this was the first time I read the original. The fellow has a point, but unfortunately the world isn't black and white, and neither are search engines and seo companies. I agree with the concept of covering all the basics and then concentrate on adding great content. The point he misses is that many companies, such as the one I work for, has numerous sites, some quite content heavy (in our case six), and a staff of one to create content and maintain those sites. Hiring an outside firm to handle the SEO was a more cost effective method than hiring extra staff, especially considering that the firm we hired has employees who specialize in covering the bases he talks about. They didn't do anything that isn't suggested by Google and the other search engines, the work they did resulted in a huge uptick in traffic to our sites, and they freely shared what they did with me so I could apply the same techniques to our other sites (and by extension, my own). To paint an industry with such a broad brush (and I can vouch that there are tons of snake oil salesmen out there) shows a lack of understanding about how the web industry works. A reputable SEO firm can produce many benefits, without doing any harm to the web, and that a company might consider hiring one doesn't reflect in a negative manner on the staff responsible for creating the site.
There is a lot that goes into creating a successful site, and very few webmasters are experts on coding, capable of creating effective and startling graphics, writing copy that sells, positioning your service, researching your market and on top of that, be up to date in the latest changes to the Google algorithm. There's nothing wrong with turning to a qualified and legitimate SEO company, any more than there's anything wrong with turning to a good copywriter when your skills in that area are somewhat lacking.
Smugmug and search engines
I have three websites that are mainly pictures. None of them are immensely popular but all are pretty much focused on the same topics (moosonee, ravens, ontario northland trains....).
One thing I noticed is that the smugmug site gets far fewer referrals through search engines than the other ones. The other sites get half of their traffic from search engines, the smugmug site a quarter.
Most of the pictures I post on smugmug have both keywords and captions. When I do searches for specific pictures, the smugmug site comes up high. But for more general stuff, the opposite is true.
Comments
Andy, i'm sorry. Like before, i was close-minded and blind to see things (or my browser behaved strangely).
Thank you, it's great/perfect!
(I eventually was very right when i wrote that i "trust you"...)
http://www.eMixPix.com - Stock Aerial Photos of NYC Metro area (New York, New Jersey, Connecticut)
--- http://www.emixpix.com/New-York - NY Aerial Photos
--- http://www.emixpix.com/New-Jersey - NJ Aerial Photos
--- http://www.emixpix.com/Connecticut - CT Aerial Photos
http://www.BestAerialPhotos.com - Aerial Photography service in the NYC Metro area
I'm very new here; even still in trial... I start reading this thread from the start and learned a lot about SEO.
Would it be possible to copy the caption also in the page title automatic ? Or maybe as an option ?
An example:
http://gianni.smugmug.com/Travel/Germany/Moezel/9365874_ohvhR#632529624_6JfeB
Like now, the page title shows Moezel, Germany - Photo galleries blabla
But if it would show Moezel, Germany - Porta Nigra, Trier - Photo galleries blabla....
I've read that page titles are very important for Google. So wouldn't this be a good idea to get higher results in the search engines ? (i'm just thinking that if someone types Germany Porta Nigra photo in Google search, that my site could show up in first xx pages)
Thx for reading...
http://www.photos-by-gianni.eu
I don't think you can do anything, we have a better handle on this now and we'll do what we can.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
No but we have other plans, for filenames, and sitemaps, for the future.
Stay tuned.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I guess the same question could be asked for gallery description if it is not displayed. I think this one should be fine since it is only the css that is not displaying it but it is still in the html, right?
Thanks!
Rich
Rich Mar Photography - Sydney Family Photographer
Rich Mar Photography Blog
I have searched Google for an answer to my question without finding a definite answer. Does someone know if using title tags on menu anchor links have a positive influence on Google's search engine and 'findability' or is it just superfluous info? My inquiring mind wants to know. Thank you to that someone who may have the answer.
http://wildworldphoto.net
http://photostuff.org
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
http://wildworldphoto.net
http://photostuff.org
Eliminating the tags made a big difference in usability.
Homepage - James Hill Photography
http://wildworldphoto.net
http://photostuff.org
Also (and more important), i don't think Google sees/indexes my Captions, nor my Keywords; any insights?...
Thanks.
http://www.eMixPix.com - Stock Aerial Photos of NYC Metro area (New York, New Jersey, Connecticut)
--- http://www.emixpix.com/New-York - NY Aerial Photos
--- http://www.emixpix.com/New-Jersey - NJ Aerial Photos
--- http://www.emixpix.com/Connecticut - CT Aerial Photos
http://www.BestAerialPhotos.com - Aerial Photography service in the NYC Metro area
Hi, I have added a title to my site and it looks like that information has been picked up by google. However, the description information on the results pages isn't gibberish or smugmug site information. How do I update the description?
Here is a photo of what I'm seeing:
http://www.judymize.com/photos/641658497_ddDv7-X3.jpg
Thanks, Judy
www.judymize.com
jmizephoto.com
--- Denise
Musings & ramblings at https://denisegoldberg.blogspot.com
I haven't paid attention to the forums in over a month, but I'm glad to see that this is now a priority at the highest levels and the important things (file naming and sitemaps) are in the works.
Prior to Smugmug I attempted a self hosted solution with Gallery2 just to improve my image search SEO and it was a dismal failure.
2013 & 2015 Travel Photographer of the Year, North American Travel Journalists Association
Facebook | Travel Blog | Travel Photography | Instagram | Google+
Thanks for acknowledging the problem and a desire to fix it.
My Blog
Camera: Nikon d300 with Sea&Sea Housing
Strobes: 2xIkelite 160
Lenses: Nikon 105, Tokina 10-17, Sigma 17-70
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I am about half way through reading it all so far
I have set up flickr, picasa, wordpress and blogspot pages.
But I am wondering if so many websites with the same content, key words etc pointing to my smugmug is good, or is too much of the same not so good??
Can any of you gurus have a look for me please
http://www.imagingtheuniverse.com (SMUGMUG)
http://astroimaging.wordpress.com/
http://astro-imaging.blogspot.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/arran_hill_astro_photography
http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/arran.hill/
A problem could be that your blogs, flickr, etc do better than your Smugmug site. No matter how good SM gets at SEO, it's your little URL against giants like Flickr and Pbase.
Bravo to Smugmug for the change in title and url. Better SEO and no need for that cosmetic JS hack anymore. I'd prefer "Borealphoto.com" over Borealphoto's photos" though.
A few random things...
- It may be a good idea to use the old url scheme for links (replacing the text part with /gallery/) in case you change gallery name.
- Did you also remove the Smugblurb in the description? I rarely see it anymore. Bravo again.
- The findability page is a bit flawed. Too much emphasis on keywords and not enough on captions. Captions are also used as alt and title tags. VERY important so fill your captions.
- We can't see it when browsing, but there IS a title tag for each image in Smugmug view. I don't know how SM does that. There is also a single page with its own title for each image. This was true before the change BTW.
borealphoto.smugmug.com
Hi Erick, i'm sorry to write this so late. You do have the capability to put "Borealphoto.com" or whatever you want in the Title of your Home page. You do it through the Advance Customization's 'Page Title' option. What you put there will even override the "-Powered by SmugMug" (unless you want it, and can add it yourself).
http://www.eMixPix.com - Stock Aerial Photos of NYC Metro area (New York, New Jersey, Connecticut)
--- http://www.emixpix.com/New-York - NY Aerial Photos
--- http://www.emixpix.com/New-Jersey - NJ Aerial Photos
--- http://www.emixpix.com/Connecticut - CT Aerial Photos
http://www.BestAerialPhotos.com - Aerial Photography service in the NYC Metro area
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/09/google-does-not-use-keywords-meta-tag.html
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Thanks. This used to put the same title on every pages so I left it empty. I see that changed as well and it's good.
borealphoto.smugmug.com
And as Andy and others have said here, you need more than tags, image titles, et al in order to reach the top of competitive search phrases.
A case in point ... I do a search for Old Bethpage Village photos, and links to my blog site comes up at number one for the text results. The images there link back to my SmugMug site, along with the phrase "to buy prints."
A secondary blog I created holds the number two spot, with the same captions and links.
Blogs are going to place higher here because they contain text, which also contain the keywords and many other related keywords. Google has lousy taste in art. It can't see photos, only words. So words will always hold more weight. The more keyword dense copy, the higher the ranking
My SmugMug site is number eight on the listings, still on the first page so perfectly respectable there. It's brought to the first page by inbound links, and by SmugMug's high ranking.
Neither my SmugMug nor blog site shows in the image results however. But that doesn't really matter to me. Someone searching to buy a print is more likely to do so from the text listings than to wade through the images. People searching images are more likely just looking at photos, or worse yet, printing them from their own printers. My first page results says at the top "prints," so they know up front that I'm selling prints.
I do have photos in the image results however, from my Flickr site. And each photo there links back to my SmugMug site through a link in the caption. This used to give me added lift in search results, before Flickr started adding "do not follow" codes to links back to commercial sites. But my Flickr site does drive a considerable amount of traffic to my SmugMug site. I do this with the link, and also by keeping the image sizes small on Flickr, forcing the viewer to the SmugMug site to view larger. And my photos on Flickr bring in a lot of traffic from search results as well.
Yes, it's another step to post photos to Flickr as well as SmugMug. I also sometime post to Picassa as too. But that's a workflow issue. It takes me about thirty seconds to post photos to any of these sites. I'm willing to invest a minute per photo to drive more traffic to my site.
The point is, there is no single thing you can do to lift your site to the top of the search engines. Sometimes you might get lucky, sometimes there isn't much competition for the search phrase, but usually it requires selecting the right keywords and having a multi-pronged approach. Google changes its algorithm frequently, as do the other search engines. Having several strategies keeps you from getting whacked when suddenly your SEO strategy is downgraded by an algorithm change.
SmugMug does a good job of covering the basics and sure, they could do even more. And I'm betting they will. But if you want to compete against heavily competitive keywords and phrases, you have to go the extra mile.
The Green Man Design Studio
I wanted to post here anyway but after reading your very informative and very true message, i want to reply and also ask you a few questions. (maybe i'll also get some answers from SmugMug...)
SmugMug might do a good job for lifting its own and its members' relevance/rating in the eyes of search engines (in regard to photos in general and online galleries). But i don't need people to reach ME, i want them to find and reach what they are searching for (the search keyword phrase they insert).
I think i'm getting traffic in spite of SmugMug! Another words, people reach a certain gallery of mine according to their keyword (¨aerial photos of Southampton ny¨, for example). I'm not sure SmugMug helps me at all; as a matter of fact i didn't find myself on the first Google results page, but i did find a link to FOTOSEARCH.com (to one of their members).!!!!!??????
I have other website which i fully control and can see the difference (but to be honest, it might be that i'm fairly new in SmugMug).
Even though all my images have captions, none is found on Google Images. The same applies to my keywords in SmugMug - search engines don't see them (in spite of SmugMug stressing their importance)!!
Another thing, SmugMug claims special relationship with their neighbor Google, how come i get more visitors through BING!????
Todd, i have Flicker and Picassa on my 'to do list', but was waiting to finish my site here first; do you still recommend them (and/or others) as a worthwhile (and effective) source for additional visits and Rating?
Thanks for your time spent reading the above.
http://www.eMixPix.com - Stock Aerial Photos of NYC Metro area (New York, New Jersey, Connecticut)
--- http://www.emixpix.com/New-York - NY Aerial Photos
--- http://www.emixpix.com/New-Jersey - NJ Aerial Photos
--- http://www.emixpix.com/Connecticut - CT Aerial Photos
http://www.BestAerialPhotos.com - Aerial Photography service in the NYC Metro area
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Flickr seems to be dead for me now. They put "do not follow" codes on all links, and I even got an email asking me to remove all links to my commercial site from Flickr photos, though I haven't heard of a lot of others being told the same thing. I'm thinking they might have a bit of sour grapes towards SmugMug sites.
Any social media site, be it Flickr, Picassa, MySpace, Facebook et al can be used to drive traffic to your site, but they all require a bit of effort to get the traffic flowing. The trick is not to rely on any one element to drive your traffic - be it google or social media. Eventually something changes and you find yourself back to square one. If you're diversified enough, you don't suffer much when one stream dries up.
The Green Man Design Studio
I read a few responses to that blog post elsewhere, but this was the first time I read the original. The fellow has a point, but unfortunately the world isn't black and white, and neither are search engines and seo companies. I agree with the concept of covering all the basics and then concentrate on adding great content. The point he misses is that many companies, such as the one I work for, has numerous sites, some quite content heavy (in our case six), and a staff of one to create content and maintain those sites. Hiring an outside firm to handle the SEO was a more cost effective method than hiring extra staff, especially considering that the firm we hired has employees who specialize in covering the bases he talks about. They didn't do anything that isn't suggested by Google and the other search engines, the work they did resulted in a huge uptick in traffic to our sites, and they freely shared what they did with me so I could apply the same techniques to our other sites (and by extension, my own). To paint an industry with such a broad brush (and I can vouch that there are tons of snake oil salesmen out there) shows a lack of understanding about how the web industry works. A reputable SEO firm can produce many benefits, without doing any harm to the web, and that a company might consider hiring one doesn't reflect in a negative manner on the staff responsible for creating the site.
There is a lot that goes into creating a successful site, and very few webmasters are experts on coding, capable of creating effective and startling graphics, writing copy that sells, positioning your service, researching your market and on top of that, be up to date in the latest changes to the Google algorithm. There's nothing wrong with turning to a qualified and legitimate SEO company, any more than there's anything wrong with turning to a good copywriter when your skills in that area are somewhat lacking.
The Green Man Design Studio
I have three websites that are mainly pictures. None of them are immensely popular but all are pretty much focused on the same topics (moosonee, ravens, ontario northland trains....).
One thing I noticed is that the smugmug site gets far fewer referrals through search engines than the other ones. The other sites get half of their traffic from search engines, the smugmug site a quarter.
Most of the pictures I post on smugmug have both keywords and captions. When I do searches for specific pictures, the smugmug site comes up high. But for more general stuff, the opposite is true.