MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Google Images' new layout - how this impacts photographers and webmasters  (Read 25858 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #125 on: February 09, 2013, 08:24 »
+4
Surely the problem isn't off our own websites where the images would normally be watermarked, but people who have licensed them having the images on their sites, easily harvested by Google.
I can't imagine the agencies making a rule that anyone licensing an image must prevent Google from indexing them, and the horse has already bolted anyway.


« Reply #126 on: February 09, 2013, 09:30 »
0
In addition, many hosting solutions allow you to disallow hotlinking right in your control panel for those that aren't comfortable working with .htaccess files.

« Reply #127 on: February 09, 2013, 18:14 »
+1
In addition, many hosting solutions allow you to disallow hotlinking right in your control panel for those that aren't comfortable working with .htaccess files.

I have the right click disable but this is not the problem. The problem is not in Watermarked/small files . Is in big files , legally bought used without conscience .

  Disable and change the .htaccess in out of question. Which agency will take an action to get their images and tags out of search engines? This is insane!

  If agencies provide a way to buyers get the files with proper size and mark for web at the same time they can have the HD file. Do incentives to get people attention to these problem will be the right thing to do or at least what agencies can do in a easy way.

Search engines function is looking for something people need. If exists big files on web they index them. But search engines are our best friends to, if they dont exist how people find us. People can find us looking for images to.

  Socials networks are very problematic to. Do you imagine how many images exist in Facebook of families, babies, childs, events.....all in maximum resolution FB allows . All free images for pirates.

I am thinking if someone just try to do a research of stock market sales before and after Facebook  ??? ???

Off course , now, all of us must live with it and share the good things it have! Facebook have good things to.

What Facebook dont have and Google dont have is a way of people add auto watermarks to their files. Google have so many things and utilities, why they dont provide an online skill to resize and mark files ?

Facebook have so many app and developments , why someone dont invent an Facebook app to mark and resize images with customize watermarks ?
« Last Edit: February 09, 2013, 18:24 by brmonico »

« Reply #128 on: February 09, 2013, 18:18 »
+4
In addition, many hosting solutions allow you to disallow hotlinking right in your control panel for those that aren't comfortable working with .htaccess files.

  Disable and change the .htaccess in out of question. Which agency will take an action to get their images and tags out of search engines? This is insane!

Why do we need our images in search engines if they don't link back to the web site? I think a lot of savvy websites will soon block the Google Images bot, which is easy to do in robots.txt.

If someone finds one of the images from my website in Google Images, their only course of action is to ignore it, or download it without my authorization. If people looking at my images aren't heading to the purchase page, what's the point of having images indexed by Google at all?

BTW, if someone chooses to DL the image illegally, they use your bandwidth too.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2013, 19:03 by djpadavona »

« Reply #129 on: February 09, 2013, 18:33 »
-2
In addition, many hosting solutions allow you to disallow hotlinking right in your control panel for those that aren't comfortable working with .htaccess files.

  Disable and change the .htaccess in out of question. Which agency will take an action to get their images and tags out of search engines? This is insane!

Why do we need our images in search engines if they don't link back to the web site? I think a lot of savvy websites will soon block the Google Images bot, which is easy to do in robots.txt.

If someone finds one of the images from my website in Google Images, their only course of action is to ignore it, or download it without my authorization. They can't click on it and be taken to the purchase page, so what's the point of having images indexed by Google at all?

BTW, if someone chooses to DL the image illegally, they use your bandwidth too.

Sorry but the new search engine provide a relink to page and site for people buying the image. You have 3 options :
- image details
- Visit page - send you to the site were image is. In case of an agency, send to page were it is on sale.
- See image in original size (indexed size) - in case of agencies will present watermark.
- Even provide the copyright message at the end of page

- So i dont see Google like an enemy here....I see many people are uploading files to web without conscience. All images that appear in google from my site have watermark, the same size as showed page, relink to agency and page for people buy..... Not much different of Pinterest .....

« Reply #130 on: February 09, 2013, 18:41 »
+1
You aren't selling from your own site, so you aren't privy to the statistics. The link almost everyone clicks on is "View Original Image." This takes you to the image itself (watermarked in our case), not the web page where potential sales occur.

Nobody clicks on the tiny "Visit Page" button. Our statistics prove it, and so do Dreamstime's, and those of GLStockImages.

« Reply #131 on: February 10, 2013, 03:39 »
+1
You aren't selling from your own site, so you aren't privy to the statistics. The link almost everyone clicks on is "View Original Image." This takes you to the image itself (watermarked in our case), not the web page where potential sales occur.

Nobody clicks on the tiny "Visit Page" button. Our statistics prove it, and so do Dreamstime's, and those of GLStockImages.

OK, im not defending Google . I am in the same boat you guys are. And for someone who is starting is even worse get images stollen and gain people trust.

  What i want say is if people are getting less sales on a significant mark compared to last year in same month . I had one family dinner few time ago and we talk about that. One of my cousins have a blog about pets and animal medicine ... she never bought one image and have many stollen images there and watermark deleted. This really mades me upset , we almost have a family fight at table.
   She looking for images in Bing , not Google. And whem she goes to an agency is to get free images from free section or free images with easy watermark removal.
   She is one of manys who bring traffic to agencies but never will buy anything. I told her that maybe one day she loose that blog. The worst part is that she do money with it , and good money.

  I tell this because is important to notice what less traffic means . You are right when you says that i dont have stats, but in your stats you are notice a significant sales drop or simple traffic drop? I believe many traffic come from curious and pirates who looking for free images in agencies and not from serious buyers.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2013, 03:42 by brmonico »

« Reply #132 on: February 10, 2013, 04:00 »
+1
....I believe many traffic come from curious and pirates who looking for free images in agencies and not from serious buyers.
I hope that's true but what about all the uneducated people that don't even know that they need a license?  They might decide to join a site if they see one but if they never get there, they might end up using images illegally.

« Reply #133 on: February 10, 2013, 09:12 »
+1
You are right when you says that i dont have stats, but in your stats you are notice a significant sales drop or simple traffic drop?

Both. I have 2 years worth of Google Analytics data. We have a predictable percentage of purchase conversions from Google Images visits. Post changes, our referral rate is almost zero while our images continued to be "viewed" (or worse) within Google Images.

« Reply #134 on: February 11, 2013, 09:28 »
+1
I don't enough data but I think that what said djpadavona is right. If an effective link to the source is not provided by bigG the best choice is block the google bot.
Just change strategy; best SEO for the website so who want some pictures can go to the website and buy it.
If Google truly wants to protect the copyright, can put over the images a beautiful watermak with the words: you may not use this image if you want to use it click the button: go to the page.
The link to the original image without copyright is simply, a lack of protection. It's like leaving the house, leaving the door open and then wonder if something is missing when you return. And honestly that Google kows.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
5837 Views
Last post March 21, 2007, 15:55
by a.k.a.-tom
21 Replies
7015 Views
Last post March 12, 2012, 22:55
by RacePhoto
64 Replies
17998 Views
Last post September 03, 2013, 13:37
by cascoly
16 Replies
3133 Views
Last post June 11, 2020, 03:54
by Pauws99
1 Replies
2121 Views
Last post July 01, 2020, 06:08
by Noedelhap

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle