image url rewrite to html page

[swarring]

I've seen this question asked a few times in the archives, and as far as I can tell it hasn't been solved. I've also seen a lot of people trying to help that misunderstand the question due to the frequent lack of examples in the questions posed, so I'm going to dive in and use examples from the urls I'm working with. Hopefully, the lengthiest of these urls posts accurately. :)


I get a few hundred visitors to my site daily who do a google image search, click my image on the results page, and then go straight to the url of the image on my site by clicking the "full-size image" link on the google images page. You can see it here (if the url works):

[google.com...]

so, as I said, most visitors click the "full-size image" link on google's page, and it takes them straight to the image url, as seen here: [bananapotassium.com...]

So none of these visitors are coming to the pages of my site because all they're after is the pretty image, which, from the position of a webmaster trying to make a living, is leaving a lot of money on the table.

So what I want to do is redirect the visitor from that ...jpg url to my home page, most likely, I imagine, with an htaccess rewrite.

Also, what I don't want to do is do a wholesale referrer redirect from, for example, google.com, as I would imagine this would blow any google authority my image (and site) may have.

Can this be done?

[wilderness]

FWIW (and despite your plea), that proper administrative correction for this is to place all your images in a separate directory, and then exclude that directory within robots.txt

A second option is to simply deny refer links to images from websites outside your own website (s). (i. e., hot-linking).

These are both longtime practices that many webmasters are using.

FWIW, attempting to redirect one file type-request (in this instance JPG) to another (html-type) has less than stellar effects.

[matrix_jan]

Possible solution:

Place a frame break script in your pages, so the visitors will have no time to click on the "full-size image" link, they will be redirected you the actual page instantly (depends on the server).

[swarring]

wilderness: I don't think I understand what you're saying. Are you saying that: 1. the "proper" way would be to prohibit google from indexing my images, or: 2. deny google.com altogether?

If so, please understand: I am not in the habit of, nor interested in, turning away traffic.

Very simply, I want to MAKE USE OF the traffic, not exclude it.

[wilderness]

1. the "proper" way would be to prohibit google from indexing my images, or:

prohibit or deny is an action attributed to htaccess.

I suggesting that you make a request within your robots.txt to compliant search engines to honor your request and exclude your image directory from indexing.

2. deny google.com altogether?

No, rather you deny the referring image links from google image requests.

If so, please understand: I am not in the habit of, nor interested in, turning away traffic.

You previously stated:

I get a few hundred visitors to my site daily who do a google image search, click my image on the results page, and then go straight to the url of the image

So none of these visitors are coming to the pages of my site because all they're after is the pretty image,

Which is it?

Either your accept the consequences of allowing google and the resulting inline-linking (i. e., hot-linking) to your images or you take steps to prevent such abuses.

From past experience, I'm able to convey that there is no benefit to your overall website by allowing your images to be indexed by google (or any other SE robot (compliant or otherwise)).
Image indexing multiplies requests (and more abuses) for more images.
It no way is the image-traffic beneficial to the content of your website, nor is using images with names (a better solution is to number images, which eliminates the name searches).

[wilderness]

From past experience, I'm able to convey that there is no benefit to your overall website by allowing your images to be indexed by google (or any other SE robot (compliant or otherwise)).

Unless your a photographer selling prints.

[lucy24]

I don't think forcing people to come to a site will cause very many of them to say "Wow! What a great site! Let me click on some ads now that I'm here!" At worst they will turn and leave; at best they will stay around just long enough to find the image they wanted.

Incidentally, going to a site directly from image search will leave the search engine, rather than your own page, listed as referer for all images. I just recently figured this out (the same goes for translate) and had to add a line to my anti-hotlinking code:

RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www\.google\.com/imgres

so that people who do go to the site can see the pictures. Conversely, a couple of directories are off-limits to Googlebot-Image. I don't mind people looking at pictures in isolation; I do mind them searching for hotlink fodder.

From past experience, I'm able to convey that there is no benefit to your overall website by allowing your images to be indexed by google (or any other SE robot (compliant or otherwise)).

It depends on the image. People don't seem to be as likely to hotlink to educational or informational pictures; they just want to know what "queue fourchee" or "statant guardant" means. No skin off my nose.

And maybe at some distant date when they're looking for something completely unrelated, they'll say "Oh, hey, I remember that site name. They had what I was looking for last time around." And then you'll get a bona fide visitor who is predisposed to trust you.

[wilderness]

It depends on the image.

Whatever ;)

[swarring]

I am really surprised by your responses.

I didn't ask what you personally thought my best image policy ought to be wilderness, or, lucy, whether it was an effective marketing strategy to force people to come to my site.

But, sadly, it is obvious you get your egos stroked ignoring questions and ejaculating unsolicited advice, and if I want helpful information I'll have to look elsewhere.

[wilderness]

All you need to do is search the webmaster world archives, where "anti hot-linking" examples have been provided possibly thousands of times and for more than ten years.

RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} .
RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://(www\.)?example\.(com|net) [NC]
RewriteRule \.(jpg|gif|pdf|ico)$ - [NC,F]

You might also review the Forum Charter and specifically the
Forum Etiquette:, section.

[lucy24]

Your answer came in the very first reply.

attempting to redirect one file type-request (in this instance JPG) to another (html-type) has less than stellar effects.

Everything else was just chitchat.

I can personally testify that attempting to redirect hotlinks to a perfectly lovely MP3 of a blaring siren Did Not Work. Darn it all. I did once know someone who redirected hotlinked images to carefully chosen pages-- but she was running her own server out of her garage. That gives you more options.

[wilderness]

Also in the Forum Library:

How To Deny Direct Linking To .jpg Files [webmasterworld.com]

[lucy24]

Oh, lordy lordy. Thank heavens the tried-and-true rule is still valid for most people most of the time: The Average Hotlinker Is Stupid.