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.
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
-
International SEO and duplicate content: what should I do when hreflangs are not enough?
Hi, A follow up question from another one I had a couple of months ago: It has been almost 2 months now that my hreflangs are in place. Google recognises them well and GSC is cleaned (no hreflang errors). Though I've seen some positive changes, I'm quite far from sorting that duplicate content issue completely and some entire sub-folders remain hidden from the SERP.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GhillC
I believe it happens for two reasons: 1. Fully mirrored content - as per the link to my previous question above, some parts of the site I'm working on are 100% similar. Quite a "gravity issue" here as there is nothing I can do to fix the site architecture nor to get bespoke content in place. 2. Sub-folders "authority". I'm guessing that Google prefers sub-folders over others due to their legacy traffic/history. Meaning that even with hreflangs in place, the older sub-folder would rank over the right one because Google believes it provides better results to its users. Two questions from these reasons:
1. Is the latter correct? Am I guessing correctly re "sub-folders" authority (if such thing exists) or am I simply wrong? 2. Can I solve this using canonical tags?
Instead of trying to fix and "promote" hidden sub-folders, I'm thinking to actually reinforce the results I'm getting from stronger sub-folders.
I.e: if a user based in belgium is Googling something relating to my site, the site.com/fr/ subfolder shows up instead of the site.com/be/fr/ sub-sub-folder.
Or if someone is based in Belgium using Dutch, he would get site.com/nl/ results instead of the site.com/be/nl/ sub-sub-folder. Therefore, I could canonicalise /be/fr/ to /fr/ and do something similar for that second one. I'd prefer traffic coming to the right part of the site for tracking and analytic reasons. However, instead of trying to move mountain by changing Google's behaviour (if ever I could do this?), I'm thinking to encourage the current flow (also because it's not completely wrong as it brings traffic to pages featuring the correct language no matter what). That second question is the main reason why I'm looking out for MoZ's community advice: am I going to damage the site badly by using canonical tags that way? Thank you so much!
G0 -
Category Pages & Content
Hi Does anyone have any great examples of an ecommerce site which has great content on category pages or product listing pages? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey1 -
SEO page descriptions on mobile - how to hide while preserving the juice for SEO?
Hi everybody, On our pages we have crafted good text paragraphs for SEO purposes. On desktop everything is fine but on mobile the paragraph of text pushes the main content really low on the page. Is there a way of hiding the text while preserving the SEO juices and not getting penalised by Google for spamming techniques? I'd appreciate any recommendations on how to deal with this. Thanks very much!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Firebox0 -
How does Infinite Scrolling work with unique URLS as users scroll down? And is this SEO friendly?
I was on a site today and as i scrolled down and viewed the other posts that were below the top one i read, i noticed that each post below the top one had its own unique URL. I have not seen this and was curious if this method of infinite scrolling is SEO friendly. Will Google's spiders scroll down and index these posts below the top one and index them? The URLs of these lower posts by the way were the same URLs that would be seen if i clicked on each of these posts. Looking at Google's preferred method for Infinite scrolling they recommend something different - https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2014/02/infinite-scroll-search-friendly.html . Welcome all insight. Thanks! Christian
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Sundance_Kidd0 -
Is it bad for SEO to have a page that is not linked to anywhere on your site?
Hi, We had a content manager request to delete a page from our site. Looking at the traffic to the page, I noticed there were a lot of inbound links from credible sites. Rather than deleting the page, we simply removed it from the navigation, so that a user could still access the page by clicking on a link to it from an external site. Questions: Is it bad for SEO to have a page that is not directly accessible from your site? If no: do we keep this page in our Sitemap, or remove it? If yes: what is a better strategy to ensure the inbound links aren't considered "broken links" and also to minimize any negative impact to our SEO? Should we delete the page and 301 redirect users to the parent page for the page we had previously hidden?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jnew9290 -
Is it a good strategy to create pages that are specific to different keywords to rank higher in SEO?
We have a main website and a local website. Would it be a right strategy to create new pages on the local website specific to rank for certain keywords in the non-branded space? Is creating new pages to rank for keywords the right approach? I
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FedExLocal0 -
How does having multiple pages on similar topics affect SEO?
Hey everyone, On our site we have multiple pages that have similar content. As an example, we have a section on Cars (in general) and then specific pages for Used Cars, European Cars, Remodeled Cars etc. Much of the content is similar on these page and the only difference is some content and the additional term in the URL (for example car.com/remodeled-cars and /european-cars). In the past few months, we've noticed a dip in our organic ranking and started doing research. Also, we noticed that Google, in SERPs, shows the general page (cars.com/cars) and not the specific page (/european-cars), even if the specific page has more content. Can having multiple pages with similar content hurt SEO? If so, what is the best way to remedy this? We can consolidate some of the pages and make the difference between them a little clearer, but does it make that much of a difference for rankings? Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JonathonOhayon0 -
How much content on PDF download page
Hello, This is about content for an ecommerce site. We have an article page that we also created a PDF out of. We have an HTML page that doesn't have anything commercial on it that is the download page for the PDF page. How much of the article do you recommend we put on the non-commercial HTML download page? Should we put most of the article on there? We're trying to get people to link to the HTML Download page, not the PDF.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobGW0