Image "Alt" tags and SEO?

Hello again my xara using chums!

i have a number of sites all created with various versions of the Fantastic Xara software, all of which now updated etc with Designer Pro 6.

I have been learning about SEO just recently and have found out that Google in particular, are using image "Alt" tags more and more, thus increasing or decreasing your Search Engine visibility.

I have added "Alt" tags to all the visible pictures etc that i have added to pretty much all my websites, however, another issue now stands firmly between my sites and a good Search result. each and every "object drawn" in a Xara webpage is considered an image, and therefore you might have 30 or 40 images making up your homepage, NOT including any pictures you may wish to add yourself.

And heres the RUB, is there any way of adding an "Image Alt Tag" to all these different objects "en mass" so that Google and possibly others dont start demoting our precious websites?

Could the the software name it something for instance, then if we (the user)want to change it we can?

There are so many different opinions on SEO and the importance of different techniques, but i can personally confirm that Google are really looking at these damn things now, and it could have serious consequences for anyone using Xara.

Please HELP...

As always many thanks in advance.

Regards

Nick.

I'm not sure if Google would be even more upset at having lots of alt tags all the same as having none. I don't think it's sensible to add alt tags to things that aren't relevant - such as page graphics that aren't content relevant. I think a little more reflection might be wise before suggesting using Xara will have serious consequences for SEO.

Agree with Paul.

If you want to add Alt tag text, use it to identify your content. It does not and should not be a novel or even a short story. Just something that is short and to the point. And if it is not something someone would search for, then leave it off.

Thanks for that Paul,

I will point out however that my thread was, and i quote "Google are really looking at these damn things now, and it could have serious consequences for anyone using XARA", NOT that it will have consequences.

I do not wish to sound pedantic, but there is a clear and definite difference between the two statements.

I am a HUGE fan of XARA and own pretty much everything they have ever released going right back to the original XARA 3D, and ALL my sites are constructed using XARA in one form or another.

My concern is that, IF, all the search engines adopt the same ideas as the BIG 'G', then there could be a significant impact on sites with loads of "Images" but with no corresponding "ALt" tags, irrespective of image relevance i.e merely a shape on the web page.

Regards

Nick

Hi Gary and thanks for the reply as always.

What you have suggested is exactly what i have done with all my sites, and i agree completely with it.

Just recently i used the "Scrubtheweb" SEO members area tools to examine some of my websites. Scrubby is well recognised and well respected in the industry for giving good tools and good advice etc. Anyway, pretty much all them suggested that a GOOD search placement was NOT going to be possible with the amount of images on my sites that did not have "Alt" tags attached.

The good news is that Google seams to be the only one causing most of the issues, however they still have over 70% of the search market which means it is a huge deal.

Is it feasible to change the "IMAGES" to something else, though i dont know what?

Thanks as always

Nick

The point is that trying to bulk set image tags on a Xara website isn't a good idea and certainly wouldn't be a recommendation from any SEO practitioner.

Google has always looked at these things and what Google does is the stuff of web folk-lore. While Google almost certainly does like image tags to be set, I'd also like to think that it wouldn't like anyone trying to mess with it's SEO ratings by bulk setting all images regardless of whether the tag was relevant to the image or the content.

I think the original request would probably be as likely to harm SEO ratings as not setting them at all.

I also think it's best to tag images manually, that way your tags are more accurate and unique. As mentioned using the same alt tag for all images on the page or even worse the site is going to look spammy and inaccurate to any search engine worth it's salt. If you leave some images with blank or no alt tags it's not the best but I don't think it will have dire consequences seo wise.

Hi Xtom and thanks for reply,

As mentioned in my previous post to Gary, i agree with and carry out individual image tagging on all my sites, its not those that concern me, its the images that make up the very structure of the website, the circles, the squares etc, these are all classed as "images".

Its these that seem to be causing such confusion, and the very reason for posting on here in the first place. I have reasonable rankings on quite a few of my websites, No1 on Yahoo and Bing for instance but Google simply drops them, and it appears to be the alt tags that are at least somewhat to blame.

It seems this is a very TOUCHY subject with everyone having their own different opinions on good SEO techniques etc, so maybe its best to just let sleeping dogs lie?

Regards

Nick

It might also be good to remind ourselves that Alt tags were never intended to be used for SEO purposes, but for people whose preference was to not view graphics (primarily for bandwidth reasons) but still be able to know what they couldn't see and for people with vision problems to be able to know what they cannot see. SEO considerations aside, bulk setting alt tags regardless of the images subject or actual relevance to the page is also detremental to such users.

Basically setting the alt tags for images that aren't related to content but there for aesthetic purposes, is bad practice.

It's not so much a touchy subject, but a question of avoiding doing the wrong thing whether it's for SEO reasons or for the sake of the people who visit the site.

I'm just wondering if there is something else in play here. You say "each and every "object drawn" in a Xara webpage is considered an image". Are you grouping small objects together? How are you handling text?

I would suggest you only worry about alt tags for SEO where the object/images relate directly to the text content in the body of the page - i.e. they support the content like a picture of a product or service that is being sold or offered. Pure cosmetic objects mean nothing and will actually confuse SEO.

Also make sure you do use alt tags in the rollover images on any menus as that will also play into the entire message of the page.

First to Paul, sorry for delay in responding.

I agree with you about 'WHY' image tags are there, and yes they should not be considered an SEO tool. My point was rather one of making sure that the ones that are NOT there (because they are a shape on the website for instance) do not interfere with the SEO already in place by other means i.e. Meta Tags, Meta Description, Keyword density etc, etc.

It remains a tricky question to answer, so for now i think i will just leave my sites as they are. Thanks all for your comments though.

And now to V12CatMan,

In Xara Designer Pro 6 and in fact all the web designer products, when you draw an 'object' for arguments sake a rectangle, it is recognised as an image (.png) when uploaded to your webspace. Now lets say you draw your website from scratch and you have 30 such items making up your webpage, you now have 30 'images' that will not be tagged as they are merely shapes on a webpage. But to Google, you have 30 images without tags, and at the moment at least 'they dont like that', so this thread has been all about whether to do something about naming all the "Shape Images" or not? and it would appear that most agree with my first thoughts of just leaving them be.

As for text, if you are simply writing body text with no effects or what have you, it appears as text with no issues. If however you use the 'shadow' tool on your text, it will automatically be turned into an image by Xara. I have gotten round this in the past by simply creating a copy of the text, making it dark grey or black, adding any feathering etc, then place it behind the original text. this way the original text is still text and the copy behind will either be another version of that text or an image if you have added any effects. either way the original text is intact...

I think the problem of images that aren't relevant to content is universal - lots of people not using Xara software will add images for presentation purposes that aren't content related (brings to mind the old 1-pixel image trick of old). Xara does generally encourage more images to be created - either automatically (as you have pointed out) or for aesthetic reasons - so I don't think Xara generated sites will particularly upset search engines, because plenty of sites not generated by xara have presentational images without alt tags.