Does image domain name matter when using a CDN?

[findwell]

Has anyone does studies on using a different CDN domain name for images on a site? Here is an example:

or

http://cdn.mydomain.com/image.jpg>

mydomain.com ranks highly and many images show up in Google/Bing image searches. Is there any actual data that says that using your real domain name for the CDN has benefits versus the default domain name provided by the CDN provider? On the surface, it feels like it would, but I haven't experimented with it.

[joseph.chambers]

No, I recently switched to wpengine ( http://moz.com/perks - we get 4 months free ) and they have a CDN. I haven't noticed any impact on my image results/impressions and the url for the image is pretty ugly like: username-wpengine.domain.com/2013/05/image.jpg or something like that.

From what I seen, I dont think that matters. I hope that helps.

[BlueprintMarketing]

WP engine is a wonderful host I use them as well.

A content delivery network will have 0 negative effect because of the way the code has changed on your website.

Simply use a C name. Or don't it really doesn't matter

for instance you could have www.example.com

that in your DNS

create a C name cdn.example.com  to the right allow for username-wpengine.domain.com

then everything looks like CDN.example.com

I believe WP engine will change that for you even however you guys are worried about things that do not matter

a content delivery network will make your website much faster and regardless of if you think the code is ugly or not

it does not make a difference nothing negative will happen only good things happen when you use a CDN I strongly suggest you use them on pretty much anything and do not worry about the coding.

I have a lot of sites with content delivery networks and every one of them ranked better after using CDN than before.

Sincerely,

Thomas

[Saijo.George]

It might be an ugly url but the content is still on your domain. In the question above it's about the image on their domain vs on the CDN's domain.

PS: didn't mean to hijack this question, I am also very interested to know the answer for the same question

[joseph.chambers]

No, I understand. Thanks for jumping in. The only reason why said it was a uglier subdomain, just to express that - even that didn't have a impact impressions, traffic, or CTR on images in my case.

Note, I get 80k+ UV a month and I spend more time monitoring traffic sources and do date comparisons than I should. I have alerts that tell me if I loose x% of traffic on a landing page.

As you can see - a lot of GB - we get a lot of image traffic - no impact, with my ugly url that I wont even make a effort to change.

Joseph

cQlysj8