Image Metadata and Rankings

[ceeze]

Hi everyone! Just curious to see if any of you have seen an improvement in rankings by implementing proper image filenames, alt text, and title attributes.

My boss wants us to start a new project next month where my team optimizes images with this info, specifically in an effort to help with local rankings.

What has your experience been?

Personally, I've never focused on title attributes, but always implement proper filenames and alt text.

 

[fisicx]

Filenames are irrelevant. Alt text ticks a box. Adding captions, titles and description is good practice. Far more important is the relevance of the image to the surrounding content and the focus of the page.

Think on it like this. If you have a page about woolly socks and a section on the best type of wool for a hiking sock you need an image of a hiking sock with the appropriate attributes. If your picture is of a hiking trail there is less relevance and fewer brownie points scored with Google.

For local SEO the images need to be part of a story. For example, if you have a project to raise a new flagpole in the town there needs to be a whole series of images along with the words telling the story. Stories are important to local SEO as they provide evidence to Google (and other search engines) that you operate in that area/location/zip code.

 

[ceeze]

Filenames are irrelevant. Alt text ticks a box. Adding captions, titles and description is good practice. Far more important is the relevance of the image to the surrounding content and the focus of the page.

Think on it like this. If you have a page about woolly socks and a section on the best type of wool for a hiking sock you need an image of a hiking sock with the appropriate attributes. If your picture is of a hiking trail there is less relevance and fewer brownie points scored with Google.

For local SEO the images need to be part of a story. For example, if you have a project to raise a new flagpole in the town there needs to be a whole series of images along with the words telling the story. Stories are important to local SEO as they provide evidence to Google (and other search engines) that you operate in that area/location/zip code.

That's a really helpful way of putting it. Thank you!

 

[JS Girard]

While I'm not familiar with this area, I understand that image-based seo has different angles. Your results in image search vs. just getting an image/the right image in organic results vs. getting the perfect image for a featured snippet etc. There's also the angle of whether to use stock vs. regular photos. Looking at Sterling Sky articles on the topic (here and here, notably), it gets pretty hairy.

 

[fisicx]

As you say, it can get pretty hairy.

But the general advice works for images and text content: add value, be relevant, be informative and interesting.

If adding an image to a post or page doesn't add value question if it's really needed. Unless of course the image is just for visual impact (such as a background or attention getter) in which case make sure you tell the search engines this (eg: alt text saying it's a background image).

Web design isn't easy. There are hundreds of moving parts that all need to fit together. Just like fixing a truck or building a house the skills needed can take years to learn. The trouble is adverts on the TV and online suggest you can bung a site together in minutes using a site builder and start making loads of money. It's not the case.