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
-
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 -
Using Yext - Opinions? Thoughts? Harmful effects on SEO?
Hi All, Does anyone have any experience using Yext? We have 36 locations across the US and I think it would be great to get our local listings knocked out efficiently. Can anyone provide information on the directories they list you in (perhaps Google places listings, for example)? Also, can anyone provide feedback as to whether or not there is any harm with blasting so many directories at once? I don't want to do anything that might harm our SEO rankings or provide low quality links. Thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | CSawatzky0 -
Can you have too many NOINDEX meta tags?
Hi, Our magento store has a lot of duplicate content issues - after trying various configurations with canonicals, robots, we decided it best and easier to manage to implement Meta NOINDEX tags to the pages that we wish the search engines to ignore. There are about 10000 URL's in our site that can be crawled - 6000 are Meta No Index - and 3000 odd are index follow. There is a high proportion of Meta No Index tags - can that harm our SEO efforts? thanks, Ben
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | bjs20100 -
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 -
Why do websites use different URLS for mobile and desktop
Although Google and Bing have recommended that the same URL be used for serving desktop and mobile websites, portals like airbnb are using different URLS to serve mobile and web users. Does anyone know why this is being done even though it is not GOOD for SEO?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | razasaeed0 -
Can a Page Title be all UPPER CASE?
My clients wants to use UPPER CASE for all his page titles. Is this okay? Does Google react badly to this?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | petewinter0 -
Using an auto directory submission
Has anyone used easysubmits.com and what's your experience with it? Any other directory submission or link building tools that help automate and manage the process like easysubmits.com says they can do? I'm just looking at it currenlty and wanted to hear others thoughts before I get taken in by some black hat method that hurts my websites instead.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Twinbytes0 -
Use of 301 redirects
Scenario Dynamic page produces great results for the user but produces a long very un-user and un-search friendly URL http://www.OURSITE.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=loving&x=0&y=0#/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=lovingthebead&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Alovingthebead Solution 301 redirect in .htaccess Fantastic - works a treat BUT after redirect the original long ugly old URL appears in the location field Would really like this showing the new short user friendly short URL What am I doing wrong? Thank you all. CB
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | GeezerG0