Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

Will Google Images recognise my images?

I use a scrip to watermark, e.g. watermark.php?src=.picture.jpg

         

surfgatinho

8:56 am on Feb 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



At the momen I do very well in Google Images but after seeing one of my images turn up on another website I decided to use a watermark script.
However, the url in the image tags is now along the lines of watermark.php?src=.picture.jpg

It has a jpg at the end and is in an img tag so will Google pick this up as an image?

webdoctor

12:45 pm on Feb 16, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



seeing one of my images turn up on another website I decided to use a watermark script

It has a jpg at the end and is in an img tag so will Google pick this up as an image?

Consider this ficticious URI

http://www.example.com/test.html?id=yellow.jeep

it has .jeep at the end, does that mean Google will recognise it as a Jeep? :-) Of course not, it's a .html page with a query string on the end.

AFAIK it's the bit BEFORE the? that makes the difference if you're trying to pick up the filetype from the URI_REQUEST

Why don't you watermark your images once before you upload them, rather than rewatermarking them each time they're requested? Might save a lot of server CPU cycles...

maccas

1:13 pm on Feb 16, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Or cache the file and serve up the jpg if it exists, should be doing this anyway to reduce process usage i.e

$image_path = "cache/$filename";
if (file_exists($image_path)) {
print '<img src="' . $image_path . '">';
}
else
{
// watermark script
}

frox

2:43 pm on Feb 16, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



The file type is NOT in the name, it's decided in the headers the server sends to the client before the data.

That's how your browser decides that watermark.php?blahbla is an image, and that's the same system Google will use too.

So, google will recognize it's an image.

Anyway, I also don't like the watermarking script idea, because it's realy a burden on your server.

Just think that if a single visitor loads your page 100 times, a "real" image will get cached, while an image that gets generated on-the-fly will have to be downloaded 100 times (unless your script is REALLY smart), i.e. a lot of bandwidth for you and a lot of delays for your users.