How do I stop gallery image title to be a file name?

[Sonya*]

Our users upload a lot of images into our gallery. They do not change the title of the image and now we have these image titles that do not make any sense:

I would like to have image title empty by default so that users have to enter the title. This has negative impact on search engines, as nobody search for those cryptic names.

[Joel R]

IPS added in a special key %n that auto numbers the images.  So users can do something like "My Pictures %n".  

[AlexWebsites]

8 hours ago, Sonya* said:

Our users upload a lot of images into our gallery. They do not change the title of the image and now we have these image titles that do not make any sense:

I would like to have image title empty by default so that users have to enter the title. This has negative impact on search engines, as nobody search for those cryptic names.

Me too.

[Sonya*]

16 hours ago, Joel R said:

So users can do something like "My Pictures %n".  

That is the issue. They CAN, but they do not. Or it is something I can force? Is it a language string?

[bfarber]

The intention in place is to streamline the submission process to make it as quick and easy as possible to submit images. Unfortunately what you are requesting here is not possible out of the box without a plugin at this time.

[Sonya*]

5 minutes ago, bfarber said:

The intention in place is to streamline the submission process to make it as quick and easy as possible to submit images

Please consider to make it optional. It really has negative impact on the image search (internal but also search engines).

[bfarber]

Perhaps, but if you were to enforce every user to fill in every caption it would likely (it does, according to our past research) have a negative impact on actually getting images submitted to the site at all. So - would you rather have many images with random filenames, or a few images but well-defined captions?

You'll note no other Gallery-like service (i.e. Facebook, Instagram, etc.) requires you to specify a caption.

(That doesn't mean we can't look into this as an option, I'm just pointing out we've tested both approaches and there was a legitimate reason for the current implementation)

[Sonya*]

1 minute ago, bfarber said:

So - would you rather have many images with random filenames, or a few images but well-defined captions?

I would rather have many images with will-defined captions  Sounds like a Christmas wish... 

Yes, I see the dilemma. 

[AlexWebsites]

The issue is that the caption is the page title and is horrible for SEO when it’s a file name. Those pages never get indexed well. I would like to see an automatic default to that caption box (blank, has to be filled in) before being able to continue and everything else can be optional.

[AlexWebsites]

I really can't stand this, it drives me up a wall. So bad for SEO and internal search because its useless. Each gallery page and image doesn't get indexed for anything good at all. Showing the image titles is even worse especially for images without descriptive/titled albums...just venting because I looked at one of my galleries again.

[DesignzShop]

On 12/5/2018 at 2:23 PM, AlexWebsites said:

Those pages never get indexed well. I would like to see an automatic default to that caption box (blank, has to be filled in) before being able to continue and everything else can be optional

Hi Alex,

imo here, the best way to approach this would be to pull the file name into a input field and make that field editable (Pre-filled with attachment number). That way it gives the user the option to change the image name. To go further a check option for admin to force file name change.

Keeping in mind here if the title to the topic or image set post title is descriptive and uses the numbered attachment format as IPB does, Google still pulls the results for the image as if the image has been renamed. If someone uses a non-descriptive title however with a image that keeps the numbered format, then the image of course wouldn't show in Google results thus needing a specific title name for the image as you're asking for Alex.

A real life example of this is if I take a old muscle car let's say a Plymouth Silver Duster.

Plymouth Silver Duster on Google typed as I have it..
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS702US702&biw=2560&bih=1299&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=eAM8XIu1PJD8tAWtwrSgBg&q=plymouth+Silver+Duster&oq=plymouth+Silver+Duster&gs_l=img.3..0i8i30.4415.5906..6309...0.0..0.344.1245.6j1j0j2......1....1..gws-wiz-img.......0i8i7i30.kfJBH3gFxZg#imgrc=iX9qcUCI1w51iM:

Now, lets look at the first image that appears in that search and you'll see my second example reference that uses in this case a vbulletin forum referencing the photo that shows up first in the google results page above

https://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/attachments/8ca05c34-62a8-47d5-9581-dbfac812c74a-jpeg.1715203081/

 

If I could of changed the image name in the post below, My Plymouth Silver Duster would then be listed on the first page of Google I'm sure, not many of these cars,, as you can see only a few show up in the first line or two of images of Google.

https://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/threads/76-silver-duster-in-white.423447/

 

My point here is unless the image is named Plymouth Silver Duster in that topic then of course Google wouldn't see it because it's an attachment number and the title doesn't match. Here's where it would be nice to rename those images.

Look here and see what I mean right here at IPB in the Santa thread. I have a my Duster picture in this thread and it's a attachment number of course and nothing from Google. The title won't let that happen but keep in mind, the picture of the Silver Duster is there and is mentioned in the post as such and still, nothing.

 

Last but not least, for now Alex I suggest making sure everyone uses a very descriptive term for their image sets. That will get pictures listed in Google where they need to be. Then maybe IPB can look into this for a future update. imo it should be added. Hopes this helps some Alex.

 

Kind Regards

[AlexWebsites]

No I think you missed the point. This is for the gallery app, not forum topics. If an image attachment in a forum topic gets picked up, yes google will use the meta data and content from that topic page.

In this case, within the gallery app, each image with just a file name generates a page with no good title and with no content (unless the user added some comment), and a page title with the file name in it, which is pretty much useless for SEO and internal search.

Your image example url goes back to a xenforo forum topic which has meta info, so google uses that for the images within the topic. https://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/threads/plymouth-silver-duster.413867/

<title>Plymouth Silver Duster | For A Bodies Only Mopar Forum</title>

 

[bfarber]

Users are certainly able to adjust the image caption, it is simply optional (and as you can probably tell - most users don't). Pretty much no major gallery forces users to explicitly write out a caption. Users wan't to be able to upload files easily (like they can with Facebook and Instagram and so on), not fill out forms. This is an area where it is hard to accommodate both the user desire to upload images quickly and easily, and the (rather niche, to be honest) admin desire for users to spend time filling out forms to better tag and describe those images.