What should filenames and URLs of images contain for SEO benefit?
- by Baumr
We know that good site architecture usually looks like this:
example-company.com/
example-company.com/about/
example-company.com/contact/
example-company.com/products/
example-company.com/products/category/
example-company.com/products/category/productname/
Now, when it comes to Google Image search, it is clear that the img alt tag, filename/URL, and surrounding text (captions, headings, paragraphs) have an effect on ranking.
I want to ask about the filename of the images that we should use (e.g. product-photo.jpg).
...but first about the URL:
Often web developers stick all images in a single folder in the root: example-company.com/img/ — and I have stopped doing that. (I don't want to get into it, but basically, it seems more semantic for images which make up part of the content at each sub-directory)
However, when all images appear in a folder, I feel that their filename needs to reflect what they are a bit more than usual, for example:
example-company.com/img/example-company-productname-category.jpg
It's a longer filename than just product.png, but as long as it's relevant, I see no problem with regards to SEO (unless you're keyword stuffing), and it could even help rank for keywords:
"example company"
"productname"
"category"
So no questions there.
But what about when we have places images in the site architecture we outlined at the beginning? In other words, what if image URL paths look like this:
example-company.com/products/category/productname/productname.jpg
My question is, should the URL be kept short like above and only have the "productname" (and some descriptive keywords) as part of it's filename?
Or, should it also include the "example-company" and "category"? Like so:
example-company.com/products/category/productname/example-company-category-productname.jpg
That seems much longer, and redundant when we look at the URL, but here are a few considerations.
Images are often downloaded onto computers, and, to the average user, they lose their original URL and thus — it isn't clear where they came from.
Also, some social networks, forums, and other platforms leave the
filename intact when uploaded. (Many others rewrite it, for example,
Pinterest and Facebook.)
Another consideration, will this really help (even if ever so
slightly) rank in Google Image Search, or at least inform Google that
the product is something specific to the "example-company"? For
example, what if this product can only be bought at this store and is
the flagship product? In addition to an abundance of internal links
to this product page, would having the "example company" name and
"category" help it appear in "example company" searches?
In other words, is less more?
