Optimum for FB timeline
drcarl
Registered Users Posts: 104 Major grins
Not the galleries, not the cover photo, --for an image that appears "shared" on The Wall.
This is not a giant priority, though for the time I've spent, you'd think it was.
I made a 1200x1200 px box at 300 dpi. I filled it with a smooth gradient. I put in three lines of text and have experimented with uploads of varying sizes, varying dpi's, saved "for the web" and tried .jpgs and .pngs, have tried 72, 96 150, 180 and 300 dpi. (The 300 actually looks the best; I though 96 was the most a disply could display)....and have tried various degrees of sharpening via differing techniques. I have not tried lower quality settings for .jpg compression (10 is as low as I've been).
The pixelization occurs around the text and makes the background pixelated and the text soft.
I'm probably crazy to think there is some kind of optimum size (and settings) for this. Hi-rez photos look great....not this plain background with text. BTW - I am also trying to zero-in on what dimensions should be used to allow the entire image to be seen, not one with edges cut-off.
Comments? Considerations? Reflections?
TIA
drcarl
This is not a giant priority, though for the time I've spent, you'd think it was.
I made a 1200x1200 px box at 300 dpi. I filled it with a smooth gradient. I put in three lines of text and have experimented with uploads of varying sizes, varying dpi's, saved "for the web" and tried .jpgs and .pngs, have tried 72, 96 150, 180 and 300 dpi. (The 300 actually looks the best; I though 96 was the most a disply could display)....and have tried various degrees of sharpening via differing techniques. I have not tried lower quality settings for .jpg compression (10 is as low as I've been).
The pixelization occurs around the text and makes the background pixelated and the text soft.
I'm probably crazy to think there is some kind of optimum size (and settings) for this. Hi-rez photos look great....not this plain background with text. BTW - I am also trying to zero-in on what dimensions should be used to allow the entire image to be seen, not one with edges cut-off.
Comments? Considerations? Reflections?
TIA
drcarl
0
Comments
For the longest time I only posted links to my website on my FB page. Over the past few weeks, I have been posting photos more consistently there but have been very careful about the quality of images - my settings are 600px on long end, 72 dpi, watermarked. I've gotten much better page interaction since going with photos and my page 'likes' have shot up.
Yes, the photos are somewhat pixelated but I'm willing to bet that if I posted a 1200, 300dpi shot, it would get the same amount of interaction (and maybe 'stolen' more often). I'm also not very confident in FB's security or future use of uploaded photos.
My 2 cents...
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
Oh no. That silly English language and critical, logical thought getting in my way again!
(I guess I did invite reflection).
You're welcome for the analysis, but, um, I fail to see any analysis, and wonder how can you have the opposite thought to an unstated position??? lol
What I have is an open, unanswered question. (Wait, maybe the "analysis" you refer to is the observation made by the text?)
I see after reading a lot that FB has changed many particulars and over the years people have gone from 600, to 700, 720, 800, 960 and even up to 1024 on the long side. One user had success with 960.
Am glad you are getting more "likes," (something I care very little about). What I care about is image quality and even "somewhat pixelated", if avoidable, shall not pass. My iced tea shot came up beautifully. My plain background and a little text look a mess. Why?
I just wonder what I can do to post a simple colored box with some sharp text?
Best...
drcarl
I just upload my standard file, and let FB do their standard upload, which is pretty quick. The quality of the image on FB seems to relate more to the quality of the image I upload - i.e. DSLR files look better than my P&S files, but that is how they look to me natively as well.
I have never tried to determine an optimum file size, as most FB pictures are just that - FB pictures.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin