Mike wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Mike Ellis <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
Also - I'm making this up but assume it's true - if you wanted to do this,
> you'd presumably have to put an entry in robots.txt for the entire
> collection location / folder / equivalent: Google Images spiders and
> surfaces content based on the html/text *around* the image, not the image
> itself. So if you did exclude, you'd also exclude all spidering of *any* of
> the content in that folder (ie, likely to be your entire collections
> database).
The Google image search indexing spider uses a different user-agent from the
regular web one. So you can remove your images from Google without removing
your web pages via something like:
User-agent: Googlebot-Image
Disallow: /
And whilst I'd agree with Mike that I don't this would generally be a good
idea, I do find that Google Image search can sometimes send a ton of
'irrelevant' traffic your way from a particular image. In these
circumstances, where the extra traffic is neither useful to you nor the user
(as they typically press 'back' immediately) it can sometimes be useful to
remove that particular image from Google's index. Although better would be
to rename the image/alt text/surrounding text to make it more relevant.
That said, the last time I had to do this (on my personal website) was a few
years ago - nowadays, bandwidth is pretty cheap.
Frankie
--
Frankie Roberto
Experience Designer, Rattle
0114 2706977
http://www.rattlecentral.com
****************************************************************
For mcg information visit the mcg website at
http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk.
To manage your subscription to this email list visit
http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email.shtml
****************************************************************
|