I have a gallery of images on my website. Under each one, I'd like to have a link that says "Find more like this one". This link would automatically give Google Image Search the image url and return to the user a google search gallery of images like the one they clicked.
To know what I mean by Google Image search by URL, go here and click the camera icon: http://images.google.com/
I haven't really found anything in the deprecated API, and I looked at the way google does it itself, and it seems the submit button is intercepted by obfuscated javascript (even though the form html is of the GET request format).
So I'm at a bit of a loss, not sure if this is even possible.
This is what you need:
http://images.google.com/searchbyimage?image_url=
followed by the URL to each of your images on your gallery.
Example:
http://images.google.com/searchbyimage?image_url=http://www.google.com/images/srpr/logo3w.png
I came across your question after suffering a similar problem. I don't have a gallery, I just dislike sharing my browser/computer/personal identity with Google, thus I use Noscript.
When searching for the URL of an image (without clicking the JS obfuscated button), above the results, says thus:
"For matching images, try search by image"
and "Search by image" is a clicky link.
Hope this helps you.
For me, the following works: http://images.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=your+query
Is that what you're looking for?
Related
Liferay 7.3.2.
I'm using a sitemap to create link boxes that link to other pages in the website. Links and names and all else is basic stuff, but I have no idea, if and how I could get images for the boxes.
Asset publisher would've been my first choice, as I've done similar stuff before with them, but I can't find a way to add pages to the publisher, so I'm not sure if it's viable here. Of course, I could create an asset publisher that would ask for a name, image and a link, but this should be automatic to avoid extra hassle.
Sitemap allows for automation, if you just map the page correctly, but getting the image would still be a problem.
Navigation menu I haven't really put much thought into, as there will be many pages with link boxes and would be really hard to control. The image would be a problem as well.
The optimal solution would be to get the image from the page the link takes the user to, but if that's impossible, I wonder if there's a way to give webpage an image, that could be shown here.
Got it working with a bit of looking around! This can help with same kind of problems others might be facing, so I'll gladly answer this myself!
From Admin panel, go to Settings and Additional Fields
Select Page and add a field to it. After filling the details, you should be able to see this field in the page settings for every page.
Go to page settings and fill out your info. In my case, I created a text field, that will be used for image URLs.
Finally, in your Application Display Template, you can find the field by writing:
${entry.getExpandoBridge().getAttribute("Extra field")}, Extra Field being the name of your field. Remember to put conditional statements, if necessary!
I am a beginner with Umbraco. I am able to upload images to the Media Library and then put them onto the page, but for my sidebars I want the images to be clickable links to other parts of my site and other sites.
At the moment I am using the Rich Text Editor to write an anchor tag etc. but this seems ridiculous and I don't want content authors [attempting to be] writing HTML.
It seems like there should be a built-in data type for this, or a property on the image but I see nothing. Do I need to write my own Razor code as a DataType? This seems like such a common thing that I'm surprised there is not a built-in solution.
I'm using 7.2.8
If you're already using the RTE, you can just select the image and click the Link button, then whatever you have selected (in this case the image) should become a link. No need to make your own HTML :-)
I uploaded some images to a public folder in my Google Drive and would like to display them in a Fusiontable. I defined a column "link" as "Four line image" and store a link to the image there in the following format (provided by #Mori)
https://drive.google.com/uc?id=FILE-ID
example: https://drive.google.com/uc?id=0B6qZJQj7B-4ERS1KZ3p2SE9IbkU
I also tried the following format (provided by #niutech)
http://googledrive.com/host/<folderID>/<filename>
Unfortunately the result looks like this (screenshot 1)
Only after right click onto the image placeholder and selecting "View image", the image is displayed in a separate window. Now going back to the fusiontable the image appears correctly, see screenshot 2:
What could be the solution to this problem? I would like to see all images without need to right click first. Btw, I'm using Firefox.
EDIT: I now set the Fusiontable to "visible to anybody with link" and tested with Google Chrome and Opera. There it works fine. Firefox still does not work. Seems to be a browser issue...
I now set the Fusiontable to "visible to anybody with link" and tested with Google Chrome and Opera. There it works fine. Firefox still does not work. Seems to be a browser issue...
After many attempts I was only able to upload my own images to fusion tables via Dropbox and not Drive. I could not find a way to automate this, so for many images it might be better to go to another visualization platform.
Upload the images to your personal Dropbox (mine were .png)
For each image:
Click on Share -> Create a Link -> Copy link.
Open the 'shareable link' in a new tab. It might help to open the link in a private browser to check that anyone not logged in to Dropbox can view the image. Then right click on your image and go to 'Copy Image Location' (Firefox) or 'Copy Image Address' (Chrome). You will notice if you put this link in a new tab it will prompt you to automatically start downloading the image.
Paste this image location URL into the appropriate fusion table cell and make sure the column attribute is defined as e.g. "Four line image" and not 'URL'.
You almost had the correct answer. You have to change your picture's URL from the one for viewing the picture, to a direct URL for download.
See https://www.labnol.org/internet/direct-links-for-google-drive/28356/ for details.
I managed to do this in a calculated column (I use google form to gather info, then google spreadsheet and than synchronized fusion table). I changed the URL with spreadsheet formula:
=CONCAT("https://drive.google.com/uc?export=download&id=",right(left('URL',(len('URL')-17)),len('URL')-49))
Where 'URL' is the URL for viewing your picture in the browser.
Hope it helps anyone else!
I want to have some text overlay on Images and am using WordPress.
See this site - http://www.gxigroup.com
On the site, in Center, you can see an Image whose description is hid just LEFT side. When the "Show Text" button is clicked, the text comes up on the Image.
My questions is, How can I get the same functionality on my website running WordPress?
You can do it by adding some javascript to your header.php template file. Start with these and you should be able to get it.
http://codex.wordpress.org/Using_Javascript
http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/tags/javascript-slider
It can be easily done with jQuery. I recommend you to search on Google "jquery slide panel examples", theres millions of plugins that do the effect you want.
Some of them:
http://web-kreation.com/demos/Sliding_login_panel_jquery/#
http://www.webdesignerwall.com/demo/jquery/simple-slide-panel.html
http://web-kreation.com/demos/login_panel_mooslide/
This may be a dumb question, but I really have no idea and I'm utterly curious! So please bear with me.
What I know is search engines just read HTML and words in a site. They usually ignore CSS or part of it. They arguably cannot read images. Do they?
If they really cannot or ignore to read those, then my question is how do they make screenshot, which is a page that is presented just the way as CSS makes it, and has images.
If they do not read CSS, images, and they also do not like human being to open it in his or her screen. How do they make the screenshot?
Thanks!
Are you referring to Google's new screenshot feature, or their old cache feature? Your question is talking about screenshots and doesn't mention the cache at all, but your comments on your question seem to imply that you're referring to the cache, not the screenshots.
In the case of the screenshots:
You are correct in that search engines usually only read the HTML and text on a website, because that's all they need. But that doesn't mean they can't.
When they want to take a screenshot of a site, they'll just do exactly what a normal browser does when a user visits the site. Download the website, the CSS, the images, and everything else, and render it with the rendering engine of a web browser, such as WebKit.
In the case of the cache:
The search engine usually just stores the HTML without/before parsing it. It sends the saved HTML to your browser, and your browser pulls all the other stuff in the page (images, etc) from the original website. The search engine isn't reading anything, it's just saving the page verbatim (well, with minor changes, namely URL rewriting), and giving it to your browser.
There are apps that takes screenshot of pages as if displayed in a chosen browser.
Browershot is an example of online service that does it.
Here are some links and projects of webpage thumbnail generator:
Build your own website thumbnail generator with Django (Python)
Zubrag Website Thumb Generator (PHP)
Maybe I'm not understanding your question, but...
You seem to be using "read an image" to mean load the data from the image to the search engine. This the search engine does do (including CSS). When people say search engines ignore images they mean it doesn't see them as meaningful searchable data. In other words if I make an image that has the word "Hello" on it you and I "read" it in the sense that we see and understand that the image contains a word. A search engine typically will not attempt to do this, the search engine will however "read" the image into its storage if it wants to have the ability to present that to a user at a later time.
Search engine don't use the CSS and image content for indexing but they can store them on their servers to make a cached version of the site.
In the case of google I think they store only text files, so HTML, CSS, maybe javascript but no images.