| 8:03 am on Mar 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|1) if one page has an IMG tag that points to an image hosted on another server, is any pagerank given to that domain? |
No, you're not getting any benefit from those hotlinked images. PageRank is only transferred (to the target page) if there is a link on the image.
| 9:17 am on Mar 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
the question is..do you get picture rank?...does it boost the picture in the images search?
| 11:12 am on Mar 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I remember that Matt Cutts said the answer would be part of Google's 'secret sauce' and therefore declined to answer.
| 6:34 pm on Mar 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Not exactly the same question but i figured it's better not to open a new thread for it... ;)
We can come down to the conclusion that an image having a link on it just doesn't work for passing pagerank and such... or something. Anyway it just doesn't work, and we need to have it fixed.
We designed the site with a lot of picture links, some pages aren't even accessible from other kind of referrers than a thumbnail of a photo... which...
... was a bad idea.
Now, if we were to add captions... ( a short version of the alt text ) or use the sometimes already added caption-text as a link...
What do you think would happen?
I mean to our pages in G :P
Would it be bad?
I meant would using something like this cause a problem:
<a href="page.html"><img tag>Caption</a>
<a href="page.html"><img tag><br>Caption</a>
... please help me out, what do you think G will say about this ( if anything )? I just don't want to have any more complications out of being so damn resourceful :( ... but... adding 2 links for the same page would sometimes result in ... er... much more links than it should :P
( an album with 50 pics would have 100 links... and that's a bad too, in my opinion... but what do i know... )
| 7:10 pm on Mar 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
It's a good idea, I think. I often use this approach and it seems effective - as long as the captions don't repeat the same keywords too often.
Back to the main topic, I noted back in the day when getting a new domain "out of the sandbox" was a major challenge that serving some of its images from an established domain seemed to help. Not truly PR, I think, but some kind of influence in the overall algo.
| 7:50 pm on Mar 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
now the question is does it matter if you have hotlink protection? The code on the other domain remains pointing to your site, its just that image doesn't load. Does a spider know that? and if it did would it matter?
| 4:25 am on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|...serving some of its images from an established domain seemed to help |
Are you saying that hotlinking to images on an established domain used to help get a new website out of the sandbox?
When I do a mydomain.com check for links, all the webpages that are hotlinking to my images are all supplemental.
| 4:37 am on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I'm saying it seemed to help back when the sandbox effect would set up like concrete, pre-Big-Daddy. Being in the supplemental index is not the same thing as the sandbox effect, at any rate.
| 12:53 pm on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I understand and thank you Tedster, but when their websites were "new" they were probably in the sandbox when they hotlinked to my pics.
So, I guess the OP's 2nd question needs to be answered. Can their links be redirected somehow?