John, ditto on the welcome.
To take it a little further, it's also highly dependent on where you're uploading the files. Metadata policies vary all over the map.
I can't tell from your OP, whether you want keywords excluded or included. I kind of think you wanted them included for search purposes.
Stock photo sites have rigourous metadata and keywording demands.
Photo sharing sites, and there are many, range from leaving your metadata untouched, to completely stripping metadata/keywords, whether you like it or not. I guess that's OK, if it's hiding personal data from web predators, but not so OK if it's stripping out your copyright on intellectual property.
If you're rolling your own website, all the metadata/keywords can be included. However, it's my impression, although I could very well be wrong, that most of the major league search engines avoid parsing metadata from binary file types, principally to avoid 'search spamming'. If you had some photos you wanted everyone to see, I'd probably add keywords along the lines of 'Anna Kournikova swim suit'. If you catch my drift.
There's a huge debate raging currently over proposed US legislation over Orphaned Works, i.e. intellectual property with unidentifiable provenance. For instance, Flickr apparently just deletes IPTC metadata, where the copyright lives, principally for bandwidth issues. So your photos become more or less free game to poachers. (If this matters a lot, you're probably not on Flickr anyway). Flickr is clearly violating the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, you know the draconian law, that the RIAA, and MPAA base all their 'piracy' law suits on. The new legislation would set up protection for your "Orphaned Works" by setting up a commercial copyright registrar, where you could register your work, on a per item fee basis. Many creative/artistic interest groups are screaming bloody murder over this. I can refer anyone interested to deeper details.
