5 ms·

And if it is not a pintrest link it is an amp link which is equally bad in my experience. I just want to link a picture. Not a link to a page that might have th

And if it is not a pintrest link it is an amp link which is equally bad in my experience. I just want to link a picture. Not a link to a page that might have the picture but might also have the entire article/reddit discussion and not the image which I was searching for.

wlesieutre 5y ago
When I'm reverse image searching something it's often to find the original artist of an illustration, photo, or whatever. I want to know who made it, see their other work, and find it in its original quality without 15 generations of jpg recompression artifacts. But no, Pinterest has better SEO than the artist does, so it's just endless reposts upon reposts and never the original work. Occasionally you get lucky and it's not the sort of image that Pinterest users share. Then you might actually find where it came from.
- IggleSniggle 5y ago
  THIS. So much this. Time was when you could actually discover the provenance of an image. Almost every time, when I’m doing a reverse image search, that is my intent. It used to work. It seldom does these days.
  - wlesieutre 5y ago
    In my recent experience, Bing, Tineye, and Yandex are all better at finding image sources than Google Images. But who knows how long that will last.
- tempestn 5y ago
  And the interesting thing about that is, you'd think it would be (relatively speaking) straightforward for Google to keep track of the first place a given image was indexed (or possibly the first few places, or everywhere it was seen over the first X period of time since you couldn't guarantee the very first would always be the original). Assuming that original was still online, it would seem to be the place to direct searchers to, regardless of pagerank or whatever.
- jsjohnst 5y ago
  Try using tineye.com. It has noise too, but seems to be easier to find the original source than Google these days, at least for me anyway.
eythian 5y ago
I find this helps: https://addons.mozilla.org/nl/firefox/addon/view-image/ https://addons.mozilla.org/nl/firefox/addon/view-image/ It puts the "view image" button back.

wlesieutre 5y ago

When I'm reverse image searching something it's often to find the original artist of an illustration, photo, or whatever. I want to know who made it, see their other work, and find it in its original quality without 15 generations of jpg recompression artifacts. But no, Pinterest has better SEO than the artist does, so it's just endless reposts upon reposts and never the original work. Occasionally you get lucky and it's not the sort of image that Pinterest users share. Then you might actually find where it came from.

IggleSniggle 5y ago
THIS. So much this. Time was when you could actually discover the provenance of an image. Almost every time, when I’m doing a reverse image search, that is my intent. It used to work. It seldom does these days.
- wlesieutre 5y ago
  In my recent experience, Bing, Tineye, and Yandex are all better at finding image sources than Google Images. But who knows how long that will last.
tempestn 5y ago
And the interesting thing about that is, you'd think it would be (relatively speaking) straightforward for Google to keep track of the first place a given image was indexed (or possibly the first few places, or everywhere it was seen over the first X period of time since you couldn't guarantee the very first would always be the original). Assuming that original was still online, it would seem to be the place to direct searchers to, regardless of pagerank or whatever.
jsjohnst 5y ago
Try using tineye.com. It has noise too, but seems to be easier to find the original source than Google these days, at least for me anyway.

eythian 5y ago

I find this helps: https://addons.mozilla.org/nl/firefox/addon/view-image/ https://addons.mozilla.org/nl/firefox/addon/view-image/ It puts the "view image" button back.