Google Search Advocate John Mueller recently shared his thoughts on using AI-generated images on websites versus stock photography.
Their discussion opened an intriguing debate about how users perceive images created with generative AI tools like DALL·E, especially in contexts that are not primarily art or AI focused.
The post included a disclaimer that it is not intended to serve as SEO advice or foreshadow an upcoming Google search update.
AI-generated images vs. File photo
Mueller begins by distinguishing between situations in which a specific photograph is necessary and those in which the imagery serves as mere decoration.
He argues that in some circumstances, such as a suitcase that wants to sell a website, authentic photographs are essential.
While actual photos may suffer from digital enhancement or editing, the fundamentals of product photography must be rooted in reality to provide consumers with an accurate representation of a future investment.
On the other hand, Mueller notes that for general beautification of content, there is little difference between using stock photography and AI-generated images.
Both types of images can enhance the aesthetic appeal of a website, making the content more engaging and enjoyable for the reader.
This distinction underscores that the decision to use real photos versus AI-generated images depends heavily on the specific needs and goals of the website’s content.
The value of images to the user experience
Mueller also talks about the relevance of website subject matter.
It suggests that for certain subjects, audiences expect real images, while for others, the distinction between real and AI-generated images may be negligible.
This expectation relates to search engine optimization (SEO), as Mueller hypothesizes that users are more inclined to visually search for topics where actual images are valued.
In addition, Mueller offers practical advice for website owners considering the use of AI-generated images.
It encourages them to think about whether they would normally use stock photography in the same context. This approach can help you make an informed decision about the suitability of AI-generated images for your website.
Quality standards for AI-generated images
Mueller also warns about the ease and temptation of using AI-generated images as a time- and cost-saving measure.
He notes that snapping a quick photo with a phone could be considered creating “stock photography,” but that may not meet the professional standards expected on a business website.
It emphasizes that quality and professionalism often require time and experience.
AI images, AR models and consumer trust
Throughout the comments, Mueller answered questions about images, AI and SEO. Here are some of the best answers.
Should you add rel=nofollow for an image credit link?
“Links are fine. No need to use rel=nofollow if they are normal links.”
AR for 3D modeling
Mueller expressed his desire for augmented reality (AR) support in online product displays, highlighting the value of using 3D models.
“Seeing a photo is a good start, trying it out in my own space is much better.”
He also differentiated between 3D rendered images based on real building plans and fully AI-generated images, comparing the latter to decorative images from blog posts.
Decorative images and actual product photography
Regarding concept illustrations, Mueller noted that decorative images indicated the level of effort put into the content, increasing user confidence.
However, he criticizes the use of AI images for product photos, comparing it to low-quality imported product sites where Photoshopped images often result in unrealistic renderings.
“…if you have the product, why don’t you get real photos, and if you don’t have the product, you couldn’t confirm that the picture is ok.”
AI-generated images as “low-effort” content.
Given that creative visualizations and actual product photos are considered indicators of high-quality content, it’s not surprising that some uses of AI-generated imagery can be considered the opposite.
Mueller also offered another perspective: If real images represent an original source of content, AI images could represent scraped content.
“If I noticed a recipe site was using AI-generated images, I would assume the entire content is spam and just go somewhere else.”
AI content lowers consumer trust
When visitors discover that content has been “faked”, it could damage their trust in everything else on the website. Mueller suggested that even an obvious “team” stock photo was less misleading than one created by AI.
He recognized the value of a good stock photo over a single smartphone photo and how the latter was no match for professional quality content.
But he’s also aware that the lines are blurring more now that companies like Getty and Shutterstock have released AI tools trained on licensed stock photography.
conclusion
Mueller’s LinkedIn discussion publication is particularly relevant, highlighting the evolving role of AI tools in content creation and their impact on user experience and SEO.
As marketers continually adapt to new technologies, understanding these nuances is crucial to effective digital marketing strategies. It prompts us to consider the authenticity of our visual content and its alignment with our audience’s expectations.
It is essential to strike a balance between the authenticity, professionalism and practical benefits of AI-generated images, taking into account the nature of the content and the expectations of the audience.
Featured Image: Thongden Studio/Shutterstock
[ad_2]
Source link
