Geo-tagging Photos - Worth It?

[iFuse]

Am I wasting my time by geo-tagging photos with location and NAP info for the GMB profile? Seems like it strips the EXIF data out when I do it anyway? Thanks!

 

[Yan Gilbert]

This is the latest info I could find:

Even without that, I would doubt it. Google already knows the location of the business from the address so why would it need info from an uploaded image to 'locate' the image.

 

[Martin Briggs]

I guess the counterargument is that it could provide an additional layer of certainty about the address? Then there are SABs - having photos geo-tagged at various spots around a city could help reinforce their service area. But yeah, I wouldn't think there can be much benefit.

 

[Yan Gilbert]

That would make sense if geo tagging was a solid way to mark the images, but exif data can be added/changed with a simple program so I can't see Google using that as a factor.

 

[Martin Briggs]

True, but it wouldn't be the first time Google counts something that can be manipulated

 

[iFuse]

Ok, so what if you geo tagged the images with NAP and then pushed them out to Web 2.0's. etc. Would this in a sense help with building citations?

 

[Yan Gilbert]

Here's the video that the tweet was referring to. Make of it what you will.

Ok, so what if you geo tagged the images with NAP and then pushed them out to Web 2.0's. etc. Would this in a sense help with building citations?

So potentially it can help ... lol

I think if you add images to the citations and Web 2.0s then you are already helping the pages to stay indexed which will help ranking in of itself.

Would the exif data stay intact after those uploads though? Depends on the site.

Don't think there is a way to test this conclusively. Ranking boost would be very small if it is there and would get lost in the noise I think.