13 replies to this topic

[Thejspot]

Hi guys,

I'm just wondering what factors contribute to a top listing in Google Image search? From my very basic tests it looks like it's not only the name of the image but also the content around the image...

What have you guys noticed?

[FP_Guy]

Here is an article on Google Image Search, but it isn't specific on what factors are the most important. I feel that filename, alt tag, and surrounding text is the most important. I know that Google is asking the general public for help in cleaning up the results of it's Image Search. Search Engine Placement using Google Image

Edited by FP_Guy, 22 September 2007 - 12:01 AM.

[EGOL]

Filename and other on-page elements will qualify the image for the SERP. However, rankings are driven by searcher interest in the image.

Edited by EGOL, 22 September 2007 - 12:15 AM.

[Respree]

I'd recommend keyword rich ALT tags for your images.

Here are some additional thoughts.
http://searchenginew...ml?page=3624327

Edited by Respree, 22 September 2007 - 12:21 AM.

[JohnMu]

Just to reinforce some of the information from the posts above, straight from the horse's mouth (sorry ): Using Images

John

[send2paul]

Yup- and if it's blog, match the blog title, alt tags, file name and keywords in the blog entry.

I have always adopted that method, but only realised recently over the last year or so how important it was in getting good SERPS in Google image search.

I won't tell what the Google image search I'm best known for on my blog (!) - but it's there every day in my stats as well - I just wish it was something I could convert to cash!

[Thejspot]

Thank you all for your help. Drinks all round!

[storyspinner]

I actually present on this subject at SES, so this is a little near and dear to my heart. There is actually a number of queues that the search engines use when determining relevancy for an image.

• File Name
• Content around Image
• Title, Descriptions, page content
• Links to Image and how they are worded
• Images in feeds - categories the pages the feeds belong to help
• alt text (though this is minimal because of prior abuse)

Also just published an article on Search Engine Guide about this subject: 5 Tips for Optimizing Images for Search Engines, hope that helps!

[AbleReach]

Cool!

Thank you.

[Thejspot]

Thanks storyspinner. V helpful. It's exactly what I was looking for.

[storyspinner]

welcome

[Pittbug]

storyspinner

I think those are the obvious factors that we can play with, but there are other factors, which I never did manage to figure out before I left the agency. I think server response time is also a factor.

I was looking at image optimization for a client a few months ago and spent some time analyzing serps and competitors' pages. What I found was that the results shift and jump around a lot. It's not as easy to optimize because after optimizing a page for a specific image result, I found that one day it would move up, then for no apparent reason it would fall. Sometimes the image that was ranking would jump from say 20 to 200+, but a different image would rank for the same query at say 28.

[amanda123]

I think the proper keyword is the main factor of any search .....if u write a correct key word you will get top results...

Edited by bragadocchio, 19 November 2007 - 07:44 PM.

[storyspinner]

Pittbug, while there certainly are other factors (I agree sometimes site performance CAN affect image rankings) - the main contributors are what I've stated above.

I think the main reason for fluctuation tends to be more that images are a lot easier to create than content and millions of more images are on the internet and being indexed and identified every day. Just think about a retailers' site and if they have multiple views of a product. Thousands upon thousands of pictures are added to the internet everyday, the advent of the digital camera and the adoption of Adobe Photoshop helps that along.

However while I agree with you that it can be a contributor, the search engines look more at the things stated above and weight them a lot more heavily.