Will having image lightbox with content on a web page SEO friendly?
-
This website is done in CMS. Will having lightbox pop up with content be SEO friendly?
If you go to the web page and click on the images at the bottom of the page. There are lightbox that will display information. Will these lightbox content information be crawl by Google? Will it be consider as content for the url http://jennlee.com/portfolio/bran..
Thanks,
John
-
Hi Dale,
Really stupid question, how do I look at the CSS to identify that? I've viewed source but cant see that information anywhere on the page.
If you wouldn't mind, could you point me in the right direction of some information about this issue, I would be interested in understanding it better, but until you brought it to my attention, I had no idea even to look for it
J
-
Ryan and James,
Take a closer look at the div class of the lightbox (class="contact"). In the CSS for the page in question we find the following:
div.contact {
display: none;
visibility: hidden;}
In my opinion, you're asking the wrong question. This isn't about lightboxes or DA at all; it's about the display:none; and visibility: hidden; elements.
There is no shortage of information about that here on SEOmoz or in the Google Webmaster Forums.
-
Interesting supposition. i've got absolutely no idea if a stronger page changes the specific parts of a page are parsed.
Shouldn't be too difficult to work out though:
If we work on the logic that an exact match search result indicates that the text is being read and used by google, you can then compare javascript parsing across strong and weak pages.
Another way would be to look at the cached text only version across pages and see if there is any difference, although I think I prefer the first suggestion
Seems simple, although it probably isn't
j
-
I agree with your assessment James.
Before I accept this information I would like to ask if you are aware of any other similar examples of lightbox use on a page with better stats? The DA of this page is only 31, and PA is 1. I would like to rule out the idea Google may crawl deeper if the page was deemed more important.
-
James is correct. Your lightbox content is not visible to a Google Bot.
You can see from an exact match search of some text from the page that Google has indexed the visible text: http://bit.ly/nDQLlM
The only place that the exact text from the lightbox appears in the Google index is on this thread: http://bit.ly/mRQICc
-
Sorry for butting in on an old(ish) post, but I have a different opinion on this...
Correct the text used in the example does show up in the source code as HTML, but I dont think that indicates that google is reading that text.
For me there are two ways to check to see if Google is reading text:
1. Do an exact match (quotation marked) search in google.
2. Look at the cached version of the page in google in text only version.
From that information, the lightbox data is not showing up and for me that would indicate that the text is not being read.
Also, an interesting point to note is that 'Fetch as Googlebot' should not be used as a method of identifying what text is being parsed according to searchengineland http://searchengineland.com/see-what-googlebot-sees-on-your-site-27623
Feel free to prove me wrong!
thanks
james
-
I have read that article before. Keep in mind it is from 2008. Technology and Google have advanced substantially in the past 3 years.
100% of the text in all your lightbox is fully viewable by Google presently. William and I both looked and we see the text in your html source code. That means Google can see it as well.
-
Those are not issues on your site.
Your light box images are fully crawlable. Google sees all of the images and the text descriptions. You definitely want to add an ALT description. Otherwise you are in great shape.
-
thanks for all the responses guys.
my thoughts were most of the time it depends upon the script because some script hide data from the viewers while it shows the same data to Search Engine which turns out Clocking issue on website.. this could be proved very dangerous for the website.
Also seems like google does not crawl the images as often than normal web page.. because it hide the contents and creates unauthenticated website.
-
Sure thing brother!
-
Thank you William. Somehow I missed it during my review of the source code.
-
Hi Ryan,
Yes, I just did a search for the text I found in the Lightbox description for the Coco & Max logo. Right there. I've attached a couple images to show what I found.
Is this underneath a Javascript? I'd be interested to learn about the differences between different scripts as I see myself building sites that I would like to use the most SEO beneficial one.
-
Hi William.
Thanks for the feedback. I did look at the HTML and the real text is NOT visible. I am pretty sure that Google can read it even in the javascript, but I am not certain so I did not wish to offer that conclusively. If I knew which version was in use, such as Highslide, I could check and offer a confirmation.
The first image shared is the Coco and Max logo. If you click on that image the Lightbox will appear with a description that says "The Jenn Lee Group developed photography, business cards, expo-banner plus an ecommerce website for Coco and Max using a logo they had already developed. The Jenn Lee Group can pick up the ball at whatever stage you are currently in towards your marketing and advertising initiatives. Call us today! 401-885-3200"
I do not see that text snippet anywhere in the page's source code. Also, there are a total of 7 pictures offered in a group with that first image, each which their own text.
If you have any additional information, I would love to learn as well.
-
Lightbox should have zero negative impact in regards to SEO, providing you have effectively labeled your photos. I love the look of it, and although has a similar effect to flash, they have nothing to do with eachother in regards to negative SEO.
-
Hey Ryan,
The Original Poster is actually talking about the text descriptions of each logo that is listed.
The easy way to figure this out is to look in the HTML. If it's real text, then Google can crawl it. In your case it is.
So the content you have will be indexed.And you can do as Ryan suggested and add Alt Attribute to each image. It will help as well.
-
The biggest gap I see on your site is your images are all missing ALT tags. Search engines don't see images the way people do. By providing an alt tag, you can offer a description of each image. For example your first image alt tag might be "logo Coco & Max Doggie Distinctions".
There are many packages of javascript code which use Lightbox so if you want a more definite answer you would need to take a look at your specific package. Highslide and Suckerfish are two examples of Lightbox javascript coding packages. For additional research you can check out this article.
Another note. I would recommend changing your Meta description to readable text, not a list of key words. Your meta description is what people will see as your listing in search engines. It will not affect your search result ranking.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Can I use duplicate content in different US cities without hurting SEO?
So, I have major concerns with this plan. My company has hundreds of facilities located all over the country. Each facility has it's own website. We have a third party company working to build a content strategy for us. What they came up with is to create a bank of content specific to each service line. If/when any facility offers that service, they then upload the content for that service line to that facility website. So in theory, you might have 10-12 websites all in different cities, with the same content for a service. They claim "Google is smart, it knows its content all from the same company, and because it's in different local markets, it will still rank." My contention is that duplicate content is duplicate content, and unless it is "localize" it, Google is going to prioritize one page of it and the rest will get very little exposure in the rankings no matter where you are. I could be wrong, but I want to be sure we aren't shooting ourselves in the foot with this strategy, because it is a major major undertaking and too important to go off in the wrong direction. SEO Experts, your help is genuinely appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MJTrevens1 -
SEO for Product Pages Deal that will last One Day Only
For an Ecommerce website I am required to create two pages. 1) One that will be displaying the "Deal of the day", which is basically a summary of the product on sale and another 2) product page where the actual product-deal resides. "Deal of the day" page Fixed url e.g. homepage.com/deal-of-the-day Product description summary Go to product-deal & Buy Now Button Content changes everyday Product Deal Page Similar to other products, sometimes will be a group of products, coupons etc. Product deals will be stored for later re-use Not visible from the main product catalogue These products are most of the time the same products from the catalogue but different copy Recommendations? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | raulreyes0 -
Is writing good content the best SEO?
Hi, After reading Mr. Shepard's amazing article on the 7 concepts of advanced on-page SEO (https://mza.seotoolninja.com/blog/7-advanced-seo-concepts), I decided to share my own experience in hopes of helping others. I started doing legal SEO back in 2013. At the time I really didn't know much about SEO. My first client (my brother) had recently left the D.A.'s office to become a criminal defense attorney. I told him to write content for the following areas: domestic violence, sex crimes, and homicide. He finished his first content piece on domestic violence and I was not impressed. It seemed too unique, individualized, and lacked the "generic" feel that many of the currently ranking pages had. Please note that I don't mean "generic" in a negative way. I just mean that his content regarding domestic violence felt too personalized. Granted, his "personalized" approach came from a Deputy D.A. with over 13 years handling domestic violence, sex crimes, and murder cases. I was inclined to re-write his content, but lacking any experience in criminal law I really had no choice but to use it. IMPORTANT: Please note that I barely knew any SEO at the time (I hadn't even yet discovered MOZ), and my brother knew, and continues to know, absolutely nothing about SEO. He simply wrote the content from the perspective of an attorney who had spent the better part of 13 years handling these types of cases. The result? Google: "Los Angeles domestic violence lawyer/attorney", "Los Angeles sex crimes lawyer/attorney", and "Los Angeles homicide attorney." They have held those spots consistently since being published. I know that MANY other factors contribute to the success of content, but at the time I published them we had few links and very little "technical SEO." Unfortunately, I started learning "SEO" and applied standard SEO techniques to future content. The result? Never as good as the articles that were written with no SEO in mind. My purpose in writing this is to help anyone about to tackle a new project or revamp an existing site. Before getting too caught up in the keywords, H tags, and all the other stuff I seem to worry too much about, simply ask yourself - "is this great content?" Thanks again to the MOZ team for the great advice they have shared over the years. Honestly, I think I sometimes become overly reliant on SEO b/c it seems easier than taking the time to write a great piece of content. P.s. Any "SEO" stuff you see on the above-mentioned pages was done by me after the pages ranked well. P.p.s. I don't mean to imply that the above-mentioned pages are perfect, because they are not. My point is that content can rank well even without any emphasis on SEO, as long as the person writing it knows about the subject and takes the time to write something that readers find useful.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mrodriguez14403 -
Which is more valuable in a landing page, content or functionality?
I have two possible landing pages to focus off page links and paid ad links to, one page has space for content but basically only serves as a springboard to a map view style listing page. The idea is to use this page full of good content to build search engine value. The map view page is the most functional and is what visitors would ultimately be seeking, but has no real room for content. Are these content landing pages useful? Would it be better to focus on user functionality even though there is no space for content, and would search engines naturally apply for value to these pages? Are these landing pages necessary? The url's in question are http://www.rentcollegepads.com/marquette/search and http://www.rentcollegepads.com/marquette Thanks guys!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Dom4410 -
Is it possible to have good SEO without links and with only quality content?
Is it possible to have good SEO without links and with only quality content? Have you any experience?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alex_Moravek2 -
Better for SEO to No-Index Pages with High Bounce Rates
Greeting MOZ Community: I operate www.nyc-officespace-leader.com, a New York City commercial real estate web site established in 2006. An SEO effort has been ongoing since September 2013 and traffic has dropped about 30% in the last month. The site has about 650 pages. 350 are listing pages, 150 are building pages. The listing and building pages have an average bounce rate of about 75%. The other 150 pages have a bounce rate of about 35%. The building and listing pages are dragging down click through rates for the entire site. My SEO firm believe there might be a benefit to "no-index, follow" these high bounce rate URLs. From an SEO perspective, would it be worthwhile to "no-index-follow" most of the building and listing pages in order to reduce the bounce rate? Would Google view the site as a higher quality site if I had these pages de-indexed and the average bounce rate for the site dropped significantly. If I no-indexed these pages would Google provide bette ranking to the pages that already perform well? As a real estate broker, I will constantly be adding many property listings that do not have much content so it seems that a "no-index, follow" would be good for the listings unless Google penalizes sites that have too many "no-index, follow" pages. Any thoughts??? Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan1
Alan0 -
How to Fix Duplicate Page Content?
Our latest SEOmoz crawl reports 1138 instances of "duplicate page content." I have long been aware that our duplicate page content is likely a major reason Google has de-valued our Web store. Our duplicate page content is the result of the following: 1. We sell audio books and use the publisher's description (narrative) of the title. Google is likely recognizing the publisher as the owner / author of the description and our description as duplicate content. 2. Many audio book titles are published in more than one format (abridged, unabridged CD, and/or unabridged MP3) by the same publisher so the basic description on our site would be the same at our Web store for each format = more duplicate content at our Web store. Here's are two examples (one abridged, one unabridged) of one title at our Web store. Kill Shot - abridged Kill Shot - unabridged How much would the body content of one of the above pages have to change so that a SEOmoz crawl does NOT say the content is duplicate?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lbohen0 -
Rel=canonical on image pages
Hi, Im working on a Wordpress hosted blog site. I recently did a "site:search" in Google for a specific article page to make sure it was getting crawled, and it returned three separate URLs in the search results. One was the article page, and the other two were the URLs that hosted the images that are found in the article. Would you suggest adding the rel=canonical tag to the pages that host the images so they point back to the actual context article page? Or are they fine being left alone? Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dbfrench0