I'm finding that image quality has declined recently whether the images are jpgs or pngs. The problem is bigger for graphics than photos. They are very blurry on HP but look sharp on desktop. The size of the image doesn't matter.
What do you do to get the best quality for your uploads? Do any of you have a recent example of an uploaded graphic that looks good?
"The problem is bigger for graphics than photos."
What is the difference?
Thanks for asking. The quality of graphics seems to decline more than the quality of photos. I believe the difference is that my graphics often have words and numbers in them, which is where I notice the decline the most.
But photos also decline. For one Hub, the editor reduced the size of several photos to half width because he/she said they were blurry. But they weren't blurry on my desktop.
Ah, you mean graphics like charts and tables. Hmm, I'm pretty sure you're already aware of the recommended pixel dimensions, and based on the Hub of yous I hopped, your horizontal to vertical ratio also looks good.
To be honest, I'm not sure what would cause a blurriness issue other than stretching or pixel limits. You're using jpegs or png files, correct? Maybe you could upload one to another site and see how it looks there.
I'm also surprised editors are bothering to change photos to half-width; aren't we about to get rid of those?
But to answer your original question, I never have issues with image uploading quality as long as the dimensions are big enough. A quick cropping in Paint can also help trim to a desired ratio as well.
I always make my graphics 1024 pixels wide because that's the maximum number of pixels that will be displayed when an image is fully zoomed (on desktop/anyway. Maybe it's different depending on device or screen resolution). If you use images less than 520 pixels wide, they'll get upscaled to 520 pixels and look fuzzy. If you're using text on images, make sure to use anti-aliasing so that the edges of fonts are feathered and blended into the image and don't look jagged. I draw all my graphics using vector objects (text also), then save the image as a JPG while keeping the original vector graphic. The vector image (which can have raster, i.e. bitmapped layers) can easily be changed later if for example the colour of something needs to be altered or an object has to be re-scaled. The stroke (outline) and fill of text characters can be changed on probably most good drawing applications, so you could experiment with this. I use an Arial font on images, either bold or non bold. I don't know whether it's the standard or best font to use for graphics, but have a look at the image below and see what you think.
This image is actually maintained at 1024 pixels wide because there are no ads to the right, unlike images in hubs that are 520 wide. I find that when I download an image from a page after uploading it, the file size is actually smaller even though the resolution is maintained, so there is presumably a degree of compression applied to images when they are published. The other thing is that because images are only 520 pixels wide, very small text in tables can look pixelated/blurred unless you zoom in.
Hi, Eugbug. That's great information. I normally use Arial as well and often post images at 1200 wide.
Maybe I am being too picky, but I think your 24 bold example has much less clarity than the body text above it. The clarity seems to decline quite a bit from 48 down to 24. It highlights why my 18 pt. graphics text looks so vague.
These two links may be of use. I need to read them myself to get a full grasp of the details. Also I've made another image with 16 and 18 point text.
http://www.creativebloq.com/graphic-des … n-71515673
I notice the fuzziness in the image. I was incorrect about images being displayed at 1024 pixels wide. When saved the image above is 1024 pixels, but not displayed at that resolution so maybe it's the resizing/resampling that's causing this? Or is it due to the original anti-aliasing? (Any DTP experts out there?!)
I also wonder if HP is running a resampling process when we upload images. Although they post guidelines about image rights, I think it would help if they also post guidelines about image processing.
I did a test with a 156k, 520 x 520 image. I uploaded it and then then downloaded and the image was reduced in size to 68k. Opening and resaving a JPG image on your computer (even if you don't make any changes) will cause a loss of quality assuming you maintain the same compression factor. The file keeps I don't know why this is because presumably the same compression algorithm is executed, so it shouldn't produce different results on unchanged data. Anyway presumably the photo has to be opened on HubPages and rescaled. Because I set the image to 520 x 520 no change was needed, so the filesize of this specific image was over halved, but the degree of filesize reduction depends on the the nature of the patterns in the image. I don't know whether this compression is by design to reduce the amount of data on servers and download time, or just a by product of opening and saving the image if the compression factor is not set very low.
When you save a JPG, use the lowest compression factor (the setting may be an options in the save dialogue). The image may look ok on your screen, but if you save it with high compression it may have reduced in quality and look less impressive when uploaded and viewed on HubPages. You can check this by reloading an image you've just saved and see if it has degraded.
by Rain San Martin 5 years ago
I recall my photos looking distinctly sharper in previous months on all of my Hubs. I hope we can return to the crisp image quality once displayed as a standard on HubPages.
by Sqoo Media 13 years ago
I am writing a hub entitled 'How to spot a bad web designer' and one of the things I need to do is to illustrate a number of image quality issues. Unfortunately, HubPages reduce the quality of images dramatically completely obliterating my examples with JPEG artifacts. I can't see any way to host...
by Eugene Brennan 19 months ago
I'm bringing this topic up again for the third time. Maybe this can be resolved? 520 pixels for an image is pretty useless if the original image is a couple of thousand pixels wide and the detail can't be viewed (doing the two finger gesture thing only shows more pixels and interpolates. It doesn't...
by StormsHalted 4 years ago
Hubpages has recently upgraded the format of its site, which now features larger then before images. While this is a very good improvement the image quality has significantly deteriorated because of being zoomed in.Attcahed is an image snipped from the actual article preview showing the extent to...
by Larry Slawson 15 months ago
Hi everyone! Hope everybody's day is off to a fantastic start.I had a quick question, and couldn't find an answer after browsing the forums. Does anyone know what the ideal image size is for your Hubs (i.e. the main photo for each of your articles)? I've noticed that when the...
by Gina Valley 4 years ago
Hi everyone,Is there a recommended photo size that works best on the site? Also, I thought I read somewhere that there's a specific size that's good to use for the first photo that makes it Pinterest friendly.Thanks so much!
Copyright © 2022 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|