Can you use the image description for IMG ALT?
-
ello ello!
We're running an ecommerce site with thousands of products. None of the product pages have an IMG ALT.
We're been thinking about an IMG ALT rule to apply to all product page images. Every image currently has a detailed caption so the thought was, why don't we use the description as the IMG ALT? It's perfect as it explains the image.
Now the thing is, the length of the description, some of them come to 150 - 200 characters with spaces. Do you think this is too much?
Also, would having a caption and the IMG ALT be the same cause issues?
Have you guys employed any rules for IMG ALT in a bulk way?
-
I would also encourage you to keep visually impaired users in mind, as alt-img tags (and contextual text) are how they determine what an image is. The screen reader skips over blank alt-img tags, and reads all others out loud.
-
The rule should be naming the image files in a descriptive way, i.e.: "View from the room of the apartment in name of the street" (sorry, using real estate example, but working on a site in that niche with the same problem), and than using the name of the file both a title img and alt text.
The alt text would be surely shorter than the caption, also because it is quite normal to trying been short in files' names.
-
You are right. You can not have the same product name for all images. That would be bad too. Some sites simply use the image name. If there are hyphens in the image name, then some Javascript can take care of that and you would have some decent ALT tags. But then the images should have good file names in the first place. If the names makes no sense than they would make no sense as the ALT tags too.
There is no easy way to apply bulk rules to images in ecommerce sites.
-
Whilst I can see you are looking to gain SEO advantage in your use of ALT text, your primary consideration should always be for the end user: If this image does not display, does the ALTernative text explain what was there?
You should be testing this with a text browser, or an emulator, to make sure it still makes sense.
Taking this approach should yield the best results.
-
I thought that too but what if you have numerous images promoting a product? Can't have:
- product name (an a unique identifier) for image 1
- product name (an a unique identifier) for image 2
- product name (an a unique identifier) for image 3
Wouldn't it look spammy to have numerous images on a product page with the same keyword as the title?
In my view, images on a product page should enhance the product, they should demonstrate the product in action to further incentivise the customer to go "aha..this is a great product."
For example a product like a shovel would have images showing the shovel in usage.
This is why I thought the description would work as it describes the image, is unique and features the product name. But yeah, it's the length that concerns me.
-
Yes, 150-200 words in the image ALT tag would be considered spammy and you may get some sort of penalty.
I recommend having the product name as the image ALT.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Our webpage has been embedded in others website using iframe. Does this hurts us in rankings?
Hi all, One of our partners have embedded our webpage in their website using iframe such a way that anybody can browse to any page of our website from their website. It's said that content in iframes will not get indexed. But when I Google for h1 tag of our embedded webpage, I can see their website in SERP but not ours which is original. How it's been indexed? Is this hurting us in rankings? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Site Footer Links Used for Keyword Spam
I was on the phone with a proposed web relaunch firm for one of my clients listening to them talk about their deep SEO knowledge. I cannot believe that this wouldn’t be considered black-hat or at least very Spammy in which case a client could be in trouble. On this vendor’s site I notice that they stack the footer site map with about 50 links that are basically keywords they are trying to rank for. But here’s the kicker shown by way of example from one of the themes in the footer: 9 footer links:
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | RosemaryB
Top PR Firms
Best PR Firms
Leading PR Firms
CyberSecurity PR Firms
Cyber Security PR Firms
Technology PR Firms
PR Firm
Government PR Firms
Public Sector PR Firms Each link goes to a unique URL that is basically a knock-off of the homepage with a few words or at the most one sentences swapped out to include this footer link keyword phrase, sometimes there is a different title attribute but generally they are a close match to each other. The canonical for each page links back to itself. I simply can’t believe Google doesn’t consider this Spammy. Interested in your view.
Rosemary0 -
One guy using some Alexa rank tricks to gain high PR etc..?
Hi! One finnish guy is getting pretty nice Alexa ranking to his sites, even if the real traffic is not somewhere near it would lead for that cool Alexa rank. I am a bit suspisious if he is using some Low Bounce Rate High Traffic Boosters on his sites.. I will give you some examples here to look into.. Vihjepaikka(dot)com - Created on 2013-03-13 - Alexa Rank 129k!!! - PR3 - Backlinks not many qualitys.. Casinolla(dot)net - Created on 2014-10-15 - Alexa Rank 351k!!! - PR0 - Backlinks 0!!! Cashadvance777(dot)com - Created on 2014-09-04 - Alexa Rank 772k!!! - PR3 - Backlinks 0!!! Let me know your thoughts on these.. Cheers!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Kononen0 -
Can anyone explain some below SEO questions ?
Can we do link building like directory, article, press releases, classifieds, business listing, social bookmarking etc. We need to check DA, Alexa, Page Rank, cBlock IP before publishing any kind of Link but how much Max or Min. no. should be for consider any website like DA should be min 20-30-40 etc.. How can consider a natural links? Which type anchor text should be in any kind of links may be directory etc. In website interlinking we should put Exact Links or no need to put any links For.ex.my website is abc.com.au then we can put link for Website Design keywords or Should be long tail keyword. How can we do content marketing means we should post blog in internal website or need to create External Blog like BlogSpot, WordPress. In blog we should put any keyword link OR should be post without links. We can put link on no follow website. Why more website coming on Google first page but they are doing Spammy links like exact keywords links, unnatural links etc.. Thanks, Akhilesh
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | dotlineseo0 -
What is the difference between using .htaccess file and httpd.conf in implementing thousands of 301 redirections?
What is the best solution in terms of website loading time or server load? Thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | esiow20130 -
When to NOT USE the disavow link tool
Im not here to say this is concrete and should never do this, and please if you disagree with me then lets discuss. One of the biggest things out there today especially after the second wave of Penguin (2.0) is the fear striken web masters who run straight to the disavow tool after they have been hit with Penguin or noticed a drop shortly after. I had a friend who's site who never felt the effects of Penguin 1.0 and thought everything was peachy. Then P2.0 hit and his rankings dropped of the map. I got a call from him that night and he was desperately asking me for help to review his site and guess what might have happened. He then tells me the first thing he did was compile a list of websites back linking to him that might be the issue and create his disavow list and submitted it. I asked him "How long did you research these sites before you came the conclusion they were the problem?" He Said "About an hour" Then I asked him "Did you receive a message in your Google Webmaster Tools about unnatural linking?" He Said "No" I said "Then why are you disavowing anything?" He Said "Um.......I don't understand what you are saying?" In reading articles, forums and even here in the Moz Q/A I tend to think there is some misconceptions about the disavow tool from Google that do not seem to be clearly explained. Some of my findings with the tool and when to use it is purely based on logic IMO. Let me explain When to NOT use the tool If you spent an hour reviewing your back link profile and you are to eager to wait any longer to upload your list. Unless you have less than 20 root domains linking to you, you should spend a lot more than an hour reviewing your back link profile You DID NOT receive a message from GWT informing you that you had some "unnatural" links Ill explain later If you spend a very short amount of time reviewing your back link profile. Did not look at each individual site linking to you and every link that exists, then you might be using it WAY TO SOON. The last thing you want to do is disavow a link that actually might be helping you. Take the time to really look at each link and ask your self this question (Straight from the Google Guidelines) "A good rule of thumb is whether you'd feel comfortable explaining what you've done to a website that competes with you, or to a Google employee" Studying your back link profile We all know when we have cheated. Im sure 99.9% of all of us can admit to it at one point. Most of the time I can find back links from sites and look right at the owner and ask him or her "You placed this back link didn't you?" I can see the guilt immediately in their eyes 🙂 Remember not ALL back links you generate are bad or wrong because you own the site. You need to ask yourself "Was this link necessary and does it apply to the topic at hand?", "Was it relevant?" and most important "Is this going to help other users?". These are some questions you can ask yourself before each link you place. You DID NOT receive a message about unnatural linking This is were I think the most confusing takes place (and please explain to me if I am wrong on this). If you did not receive a message in GWT about unnatural linking, then we can safely say that Google does not think you contain any "fishy" spammy links in which they have determined to be of a spammy nature. So if you did not receive any message yet your rankings dropped, then what could it be? Well it's still your back links that most likely did it, but its more likely the "value" of previous links that hold less or no value at all anymore. So obviously when this value drops, so does your rank. So what do I do? Build more quality links....and watch you rankings come back 🙂
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | cbielich1 -
If Google Authorship is used for every page of your website, will it be penalized?
Hey all, I've noticed a lot of companies will implement Google Authorship on all pages of their website, ie landing pages, home pages, sub pages. I'm wondering if this will be penalized as it isn't a typical authored piece of content, like blogs, articles, press releases etc. I'm curious as I'm going to setup Google Authorship and I don't want it to be setup incorrectly for the future. Is it okay to tie each page (home page, sub pages) and not just actual authored content (blogs, articles, press releases) or will it get penalized if that occurs? Thanks and much appreciated!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | MonsterWeb280 -
Can good penalize a site, and stop it ranking under a keyword permanently
hi all we recently took on a new client, asking us to improve there google ranking, under the term letting agents glasgow , they told us they used to rank top 10 but now are on page 14 so it looks like google has slapped them one, my question is can google block you permanently from ranking under a keyword or disadvantage you, as we went though the customers links, and removed the ones that looked strange, and kept the links that looked ok. but then there ranking dropped to 21, is it worth gaining new links under there main keyword even tho it looks like google is punishing them for having some bad links. the site is www. fine..lets...ltd...co....uk all one word cheers
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | willcraig0