search engine traffic is main source of my traffics. recently, I just notice that I have alot traffice from google but none of htem are from google image search. my site is clip art, wallpaper those kinda image web site. I thought my site is new and not really optimized enough for google image search, I chaned all image file names and add alt tags. but still no traffic from google image search. all my images are hosted at photobucket, and not on my own web space, I am wondering if visitors doing google image search, they go to photobucket or my web site.
mad4 did a post about this recently over at http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/blog/how-to-get-traffic-from-google-images/
all my images have alt tag. another problem is I group all images in category. for example, I have car category, in that category page, I have 20 images, all alt tag is "car 01" , I think car is overused, maybe I will get penalized for that.
ye, my image file name is very descriptive. i guess all those images are hosted at photobucket, when user find image , they go to photobucket, not my web site.
its a great article, worth to read, but my problem is images are not hosted on my own web space, will that sop visitors to come over?
Optimizing for Google Image Search will explain everything. However... I'd get some webspace and host them yourself, putting them on Photobucket isn't a good option.
I know that the ALT attribute of an image is a textual placeholder and so it's well worth including that extra info in your image code for the sake of browsers that either don't support images or have the image display option disabled for the sake of speeding up page loads. I've also made a habit of including the TITLE attribute, which serves as a tooltip (visible on mouseover) or caption for your image. (Accessible browsers can also "speak" this info for those who are visually-imparied.) At any rate, my question is... does the inclusion of the TITLE attribute on your image tags make any difference with regard to search engine optimization? It seems, in my oh-so-naive layman ways of thinking, that any extra bit you can give Google to chew on is a good thing. But can anyone confirm whether that is necessarily true?
descriptive file names as well as alt tags and also put good quality content surrounding the image hope this helps!
Right, right, I understand all of that... I'm wondering if the inclusion of the TITLE in the image tag code is of any benefit from an SEO perspective.
* use human readable file names * use image alt tags * use image title tags these are the criterias for google image search