This Google Query gives the following top two results:


One domain ( forrestcroce.com ) is simply parked on the other, so it should be duplicate content. Very strange that it's not, actually. And it looks like Google hasn't crawled one of them in a long time - I broke a Dreamweaver template and lost all my page titles. Went back and fixed all of them, and this was maybe a month ago.

Digital Black and White Conversion in Photoshop

Digital Black and White Conversion | Photoshop. Black and white photography used to be a limitation of film, rather than a conscious choice the photographer ...
landscapephoto.us/Articles/DigitalBlackAndWhite.html - 22k - Cached - Similar pages Page Title

Digital Black and White. Black and white photography used to be a limitation of film, ... it's also the ideal way to convert to black and white. ...
forrestcroce.com/Articles/DigitalBlackAndWhite.html - 23k - Cached - Similar pages

Originally Posted by chrishirst

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogsp...e-content.html


NOTE: There is NO duplicate content penalty

I see. That is good to know. Then all these pages that are under this filter will suddenly start ranking again now that we have the official word. That is good to know! Thanks for keeping us up-to-date

Forrest as far as Google is concerned those are two different pages since they sit on different domains. Something tells me in time one or the other or even both will end up in the supplemental index.

Dup content is not a penalty it is a filter. If and once you get to a certain point it can become a penalty but it is a filter. Like supplemental index. Many dup pages are supplementaled(another thing that Matt says is OKAY. It isn't. Supp can't rank link regular index can) or filtered(whichever you prefer) but it does not effect your domain. What can effect you is if your whole site is copied from another site for and example. This can get you penalized. Reprinting an article is likely just to get indexed supplemental but will not hurt you.

Originally Posted by vangogh

Forrest as far as Google is concerned those are two different pages since they sit on different domains. Something tells me in time one or the other or even both will end up in the supplemental index.

Two pages from one of the www subdomains wound up in the supplemental index. I figured out how to set up 301 redirects using mod_rewrite, and told Google that www.* and * are the same using their Webmaster Tools.

Apparently that takes a while to sort out, though. Googling Olympic Nightfall, my site comes up as the first four results. ( The Olympic Range are mountains on the peninsula, west of Seattle; the photo is of the sun having just set behind them. ) That won't last, and probably shouldn't, because I don't want to leave a bad impression with people who are looking for something else. But that does suggest Google doesn't punish duplicate content. Ironically, three of these are to the same page, but cached at different dates, between changes. Which probably makes their job a lot harder. Hopefully my 301s will take effect before they sort that all out.

It might take a little while for them to sort out the 301, but they will.

I think they have already. It was five days ago that I noticed my site was coming up as the first four results for Olympic Nightfall, between my two domains and www.* subdomains. Now I'm only #1 and #2 in the results, both on the same domain: one is the page with the photo itself, and the next is the gallery it's in. ( Basically the rest of the first page is a post to rec.photo.digital with the photo mirrored, blogged, and translated. )

Nice and informative.

thank you

Originally Posted by chrishirst

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogsp...e-content.html


NOTE: There is NO duplicate content penalty

Guys, this is absolutely natural that Google doesn't penalize for duplicate content. Otherwise your competitors could have influenced (negatively) your rankings.

Chris, thanks for the post.

Interesting what with the offer some bloggers to publish one article on million blogs;-)

Originally Posted by mharrisr

Thanks for the link chris. Google looks duplicate content in a very effective manner and treats it very seriously.

I manage to get around it with my bots, they take an article and copy it into 100 different forms, basically, it rewords it. Is that unethical in your opinion?..

Now that's the kind of "duplicate content" that would attract this bit of attention.

In the rare cases in which we perceive that duplicate content may be shown with intent to manipulate our rankings and deceive our users, we'll also make appropriate adjustments in the indexing and ranking of the sites involved.

Hey all (especially to old schoolers, haven't been on forum for a year )
I seem to have forgot some things.

My old website has 40 tutorials www.designplanet.biz, that doesn't get much hits anymore because I haven't updated it for years, and I want to transfer them to my new site www.furix.net , I was wondering if I should just copy and paste them (perhaps furix will get filtered instead of DP?), or whether I should use some tricky 301s, or whether I should just paraphrase my old articles (a lotta work). What ya guys think? ( I would prefer to copy and paste, but I don't want to be filtered etc :P)

Does it make sense to believe Google on this one, though? Duplicate content will land one in the supplemental index, and Google doesn't seem to consider that a penalty, but the people in there do.

Duplicate content will land one in the supplemental index,

Or maybe not. Matt Cutts on "Google hell".
But lets not forget here that the PageRank he is talking about is NOT the same one you see on the toolbar.
So let's have no parroted "get more links" post from the usual suspects, deletion is the fate that will befall them!

and Google doesn't seem to consider that a penalty

Pages being in the supplemental index has never been due to a penalty.
It has always been the pages that are dropping out of the main index, or not "important" enough to be included.