| 4:27 pm on Nov 3, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I do the same thing, and it doesn't seem to cause any problems for me. Google stays out of my images folder, but indexes my text just fine.
| 4:40 pm on Nov 3, 2004 (gmt 0)|
It doesn't mind - but:
1) You should also ban the google media bot (can't remember the exact name, but a quick search will find it)
2) If you are listed in Froogle (ecommerce sites) then you should not block the images from being crawled (part of the terms and may also stop your pictures from appearing).
| 1:18 am on Nov 4, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|Google stays out of my images folder, but indexes my text just fine. |
Thanks for the replies, just to clarify, I'm not having a problem getting my pages indexed. My question was regarding Google's "sensitivity" to being told they can't take something. i.e. "you can crawl and rank my pages for me but leave my images alone!"
Anyone got any research in this area? Or even something similar?
| 7:56 am on Nov 4, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I have a number of "image" sites where in fact the image file is empty and the images are elsewhere in a file which is "denied" to everyone 'cept me ...
And some sites where there are just a couple of images in the image file and all the rest is again in "denied" files...
And again some other sites where no images are "on site" ( but the "image file" exists ) but all are pulled ("scr'd") from external servers...( yeah I know that's weird but I have my reasons ) ....
None of these has ever suffered from this ...everyone is indexed , spidered and PR'd ( for what that is currently worth! ) with no problem ...
They show up in serps where I would expect /intend them to be for what I expect/intend them to show for ...
So in short... I dont think it hurts ( those pages that return number 1 in serps on "G" "Y" etc can't get any higher if I let the bots "crawl" my images ...now can they? ).
And renaming your image files does give you the possibilty to "play" with src "pathways" and thus insert "hints" about your keywords ...
Moving them off server is even more usefull ;)..
| 5:16 pm on Nov 4, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I have blocked all bots from accessing my images folders for 2 or 3 years now and it has never caused me any problems. I fact I have dozens of #1 rankings, some for very competitive keywords.
Go ahead and block access to your images folder if you want to.
| 6:47 am on Nov 6, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|I just had a thought which is now playing on my mind. In robots.txt I ban Google from the /images/ folder, this or course means that it "shouldn't" add them to it's Image Search. Will this annoy them? |
Nah. By all means, feel free to block us from your images.
|I mean, many theories have been thrown about that Google seems to "like" sites that have Adsense on them. |
As long as I'm answering questions, this is a myth/misconception. Running AdSense doesn't help your Google ranking.
| 7:00 am on Nov 6, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|Running AdSense doesn't help your Google ranking |
Can it hurt rankings Googleguy? Are you sure the informations retrived through adsense(possible information that can be retrived could be these group of sites are under one head) doesn't affect the SERP's in anyways.
| 9:34 am on Nov 6, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|Running AdSense doesn't help your Google ranking. |
Finally! Do you know how many hundreds of threads you could have stopped if you'd said that three months ago? By the way, you being here is making me nervous, something bad always happens when you come back to post ....
|Can it hurt rankings Googleguy? Are you sure the informations retrived through adsense(possible information that can be retrived could be these group of sites are under one head) doesn't affect the SERP's in anyways. |
I think Adsense uses information from Google's algorithms rather than adds to them.
| 2:46 pm on Nov 6, 2004 (gmt 0)|
internetheaven, one of my first posts here back in 2001 was to say that buying ads didn't help your Google ranking. I'm pretty sure I've said this before.
(GoogleGuy trundles around with a few keywords..)
Ah, here you go:
Message #6. At least one smart person (europeforvisitors) later did copy and paste that quote into a different thread:
| 5:16 pm on Nov 6, 2004 (gmt 0)|
need some advanced searching help Googleguy?
Ah, here you go :) : [webmasterworld.com...]
now I remember I started as Inactive Member vita
| 6:32 am on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|Nah. By all means, feel free to block us from your images. |
Half way true. If I block you from my images I can't get into news.google.com :(
| 9:58 am on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|internetheaven, one of my first posts here back in 2001 was to say that buying ads didn't help your Google ranking. I'm pretty sure I've said this before. |
And as you'll notice, I actually wrote in that thread too! Guess that shows that I'm trying to take in too much information these days without having the hard drive space in my head to contain it .... either that, or my brain has upgraded to Windows XP and keeps deleting things on its own ...
| 7:02 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Having adsense definately affects googles view of your website.
Prove me wrong, but when I search google with my own domain name and the huge majority of links I find are adsense ads, some of which are placed higher than a genuine link to me my site.
Maybe this is due to my site not having much organic traffic, I buy almost all my sites traffic, but convince me that my page rank would not be lower without adsense.
| 7:34 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|If I block you from my images I can't get into news.google.com |
Could you expand on this please?
Are news stories more apt to be picked up if there is an associated image? Is there some other relationship between a site's images and its chances of getting its news picked up by google?
| 8:33 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Rughly translated from the German news support at google news:
Please change your robots.txt because we are not allowed to crawl your site and get it into our news index. Our bot have to crawl all of your articles.
Which is not true but I can't argue on that. My robots.txt says:
and all News and Images are on /abc/news/ and /abc/news/images/
|Wir bedanken uns für Ihren Vorschlag. Wir wollten Ihre Website für die |
Aufnahme in Google News prüfen. In der Datei robots.txt wurde uns allerdings der Zugriff untersagt.
Um Ihre Nachrichtenbeiträge in Google News aufnehmen zu können, müssen unsere Crawler jeden Artikel aufsuchen
| 9:48 am on Nov 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
An alternative solution to avoid your images graphics and or photographs being listed in response to queries in google's image section is to name them with numbers rather than textual descriptions.
Google's images section as far as I can tell only works on the name of the image file rather than the visual image content.
| 12:03 pm on Nov 18, 2004 (gmt 0)|
If I could add in that simply placing a robots.txt file on the server does not mean that the robots will listen to the robots.txt file.
My question is if you have on page directives in your metas do they override the robots.txt file?
| 2:11 pm on Nov 19, 2004 (gmt 0)|
What if your robots.txt does allow access to images, but your .htaccess forbids hotlinking? Any disadvantage to that in terms of SE rankings?
| 2:42 pm on Nov 19, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I have a robots.txt which allows access to the site images and a hotlinking protection in place and and no ill effects from doing so.
Has been this way for four months.
Do you use your keyword terms in the top three images alt tags foe each page?
| 7:31 pm on Nov 20, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|What if your robots.txt does allow access to images, but your .htaccess forbids hotlinking? Any disadvantage to that in terms of SE rankings? |
Doesn't google just cache your images not hotlink them? They wouldn't even know if you have hotlink blocking, I would think.
Why do people want to block your images from showing up on google image search anyway? I am just curious. I do a lot of photography of places and I always scan google images to see who else has taken pictures of the same places and to see if mine or better. Very handy.
Also, as another poster mentioned, google only uses the filename of the photo to categorize it in google images. First off, is this true? Second, I name all my files in this format with underscores, photo_name.jpg. If it is going by filename should I remove the underscores?
| 7:50 pm on Nov 20, 2004 (gmt 0)|
The hotlink protection is to stop other websites from displaying your images on their website. This eats up your bandwidth.
Googlebot from what I can figure only crawls the images on the pages looking for the use of alt image text.
| 10:59 am on Nov 21, 2004 (gmt 0)|
What would be the purpose of blocking Google bot anyhow?
| 2:41 pm on Nov 21, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Some folders you don't want Google to crawl cgi-bin for example.
Or for myself I have a bunch of clients keyword ranking reports online. If I don't place them in an include file and then block Google.. I can at times rank higher than my clients for their keywords. (they dont take well to this)
Any scripting language can cripple a robot in its tracks so it's best to place your scripts in folders and ban the bots from them.
Also by moving all scripts off the page and into external folders.. brings your content higher up on the page where the spiders do most of their reading.
Hope this helps
| 6:23 pm on Nov 21, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for the explanation.