What Google Actually Says about Images and SEO
Confused about image size, ratios, thumbnails, or Google Discover? This post explains what’s a recommendation is, what’s misunderstood, and what really matters for images and SEO.
Images are one of those parts of a website that quietly do a lot of work.
They help tell the story.
They guide the eye.
They make content feel human.
And yet, they’re often treated like a technical liability. Something that needs to be tightly controlled, perfectly sized, and constantly audited just in case Google “doesn’t like them anymore.”
That mindset usually doesn’t come from Google itself. It comes from years of advice being simplified, repeated, and slowly turned into rules that were never meant to be rules in the first place.
So instead of listing what you should or shouldn’t do, let’s look at how Google actually thinks about images, where things get misunderstood, and what’s genuinely worth your attention.
How Google really looks at images
Google doesn’t evaluate images in isolation.
It doesn’t look at a photo and decide whether your page deserves to rank.
Images are understood in context: alongside the text, the layout, the page speed, and the overall experience for the user. Their job is to support understanding and usability, not to act as ranking shortcuts or penalties.
This is consistent across Google’s documentation. When images are mentioned, they’re framed as part of helpful content, accessibility, and page experience, not as a standalone scoring system.
That distinction matters because a lot of image-related SEO fear comes from treating recommendations as if they were requirements.
There’s also image search, which is really helpful to drive traffic, but it has nothing to do with size, ratios or orientation. It’s more about its optimization. If you upload an image named img_0263.jpg, there’s no way Google or any search engine will know what that image is about, But if you name it easy-layered-german-chocolate-cake.jpg, then search engines can have information to show it on search results. Alt text also plays a small role in this, but the title is key.
Image size: optimization versus obsession
One of the most common worries I see is about image size. Too big feels risky. Too small feels risky. Suddenly, people are convinced there’s a “safe” pixel number they need to hit.
Google doesn’t give one.
I’ve seen people spend hours resizing old images or second-guessing every upload, not because their site was broken, but because they were trying to “do things right.” Most of the time, their pages were already loading fine.
There is no required image size for SEO. There is no universal maximum or minimum that applies to all sites, all layouts, or all niches.
What Google does care about is whether images negatively affect page performance and usability. An uncompressed image that slows a page to a crawl is a problem. A large image that loads efficiently and looks great on mobile is not.
This is where optimization gets confused with restriction.
The goal isn’t tiny images. The goal is reasonably optimized images that don’t harm the experience.
If your site loads well, adapts to different screen sizes, and feels smooth to use, you’re already aligned with what Google is asking for.
Featured images, thumbnails, and the “duplicate image” myth
This is another area where WordPress users in particular end up stressed for no good reason.
Featured images, thumbnails, and multiple image sizes are not a mistake. They’re how modern, responsive websites work.
Google understands that the same image can appear:
at the top of a post
inside the content
as a smaller thumbnail in an archive
That does not create duplicate content in the SEO sense. Google doesn’t penalize a page because an image appears more than once or because WordPress generated different sizes of it.
Context matters more than the file itself.
If an image supports the page and makes sense visually, Google has no issue with it being used in different ways across the site.
Alt text: clarity over keywords
Alt text is one area where Google is very clear, and yet it still gets overcomplicated.
Alt text exists primarily for accessibility. It helps screen readers understand what’s on the page, and it gives Google context when an image can’t be interpreted visually.
It’s not meant to be a place to repeat your main keyword.
The best alt text is simple, descriptive, and natural. It answers one question: What is this image showing, and why is it here?
Not every image even needs alt text. Decorative images don’t add information, and that’s okay. Functional or meaningful images should be described clearly, without forcing SEO language into them.
When in doubt, write alt text for a human, not a search engine.
When I’m unsure how to write alt text, I step away from SEO entirely and think about accessibility first. And let’s not overlook the obvious, AI can help with that. Alt text can take up a lot of time, and AI can do that in seconds; we just need to adjust whatever it didn’t get right.
We don’t need to work harder, just smarter.
Discover, large images, and where the 1200px number comes from
This is where a lot of confusion — and frustration — comes in.
Google recommends large, high-quality images (at least 1200px wide) for Google Discover eligibility. That recommendation exists so images look good when displayed in Discover’s visual feed.
What it does not mean:
- that 1200px images guarantee Discover traffic
- that smaller images hurt regular search rankings
- that image size controls whether thumbnails appear in search results
Discover has its own systems. It’s interest-based, behavior-driven, and influenced by freshness, engagement, and content relevance. Images matter there, but they are one piece of a much bigger picture.
Now, about search result thumbnails.
Many site owners notice thumbnails appearing or disappearing in search results and assume something is wrong with their images. In reality, thumbnails are not guaranteed. Google decides when to show them based on many factors, including query type, layout, and perceived usefulness.
There is no setting, image size, or ratio that forces Google to show thumbnails in search results.
I understand why this one causes frustration. When thumbnails disappear, it feels like something was taken away. But in practice, it’s almost always a display change, not a signal that something is wrong with your content or images.
Losing thumbnails does not mean your images are “bad” or that your site is being penalized. It usually reflects changes in how Google presents results, not a problem with your content.
This is a perfect example of why understanding recommendations versus rules matters.
Image ratios and the 1:1 myth
One recommendation that often gets treated like a requirement is the idea that images must be square, or close to a 1:1 ratio.
You’ll see this mentioned a lot in relation to thumbnails, especially in search results. The assumption is that if an image isn’t square, Google won’t show it, or that changing everything to 1:1 will somehow “fix” missing thumbnails.
That’s not how it works.
I’ve seen people re-crop entire media libraries to square images hoping it would bring thumbnails back, and it rarely changes anything other than how the site looks.
Google does not require a 1:1 image ratio for rankings, for thumbnails in search results, or for general image SEO. There is no rule that says square images perform better in search, and there’s no penalty for using rectangular images, vertical images, or hero-style photography.
The 1:1 idea largely comes from design and layout considerations, not ranking behavior. Square images tend to crop more predictably across different surfaces, which is why they’re sometimes recommended in specific contexts. Over time, that recommendation turned into an almost-must in SEO conversations, even though Google has never framed it that way.
If thumbnails appear or disappear in search results, it’s not because an image isn’t square. Google decides when and where to show thumbnails based on the query, the result layout, and what it thinks will be most useful to the user at that moment.
Changing all your images to 1:1 won’t force thumbnails to appear, and not using 1:1 won’t prevent your pages from ranking.
The better approach is much simpler: use image ratios that make sense for your content and layout, and focus on clarity, quality, and performance rather than trying to match a specific shape.
File names, EXIF data, and other things that get overblown
Yes, descriptive file names are helpful. They provide a bit more context. But they are not a deciding factor.
EXIF data is not used as a ranking signal. Google has said this clearly. You don’t need to strip it, manage it, or worry about it.
Stock images are also not penalized. Google doesn’t rank originality of photography; it ranks usefulness of content. A page with stock photos and strong content can perform just fine.
These details often get amplified because they’re easy to turn into “tips,” even when their real impact is minimal.
A note on advice, experts, and common sense
I’ve noticed that a lot of image advice starts out as context-specific guidance and slowly turns into something absolute as it gets repeated. That’s usually when confusion begins.
A lot of image SEO myths don’t come from bad intentions. Some come from experienced people sharing what worked for them in a specific context. Others come from advice being repeated without nuance. Over time, recommendations harden into rules, and rules turn into fear.
Google’s own documentation is usually calm, flexible, and user-focused. That’s a good cue.
If a piece of advice makes you feel like you need to undo years of work overnight, it’s worth pausing. Ask whether it actually improves your site for real people, or whether it’s reacting to a worst-case scenario.
SEO works best when it’s grounded, not reactive.
The real takeaway
Google wants pages that are helpful, usable, and accessible.
Images support that goal. They don’t override it.
If your images load reasonably well, make sense in context, and help your readers understand or enjoy your content, you’re already doing what Google is asking.
And if you want to understand how this fits into Google’s broader definition of quality, this post connects directly to the main guide here: Google Search Quality article
Frequently Asked Questions
No. Google does not rank pages based on image size alone. What matters is whether images negatively affect page performance or user experience.
No. A 1:1 ratio is not required for rankings, search thumbnails, or image visibility. It’s a design recommendation in some contexts, not an SEO rule.
Thumbnails in search results are not guaranteed. Google decides when to show them based on the query and layout, not image ratios or recent changes to your site.
Alt text helps with accessibility and image understanding, but it’s not meant for keyword stuffing. Clear, descriptive alt text is what Google recommends.
More Blogging Posts To Read
If you enjoyed learning what Google Actually Says about Images and SEO, you might also love these other blogging-related articles too:
- What Google Considers High-Quality Content. Google’s Quality Guidelines Explained.
- How AI Search Is Changing Blogging in 2026 and How to Help Your Creative Blog Stay Visible
- What Content Intent Actually Means for Recipe and DIY Bloggers
- Are Pop-Ups Bad for SEO? What Google Really Says
Don’t forget to share and save this post!
