Cover image dilemma.

It seems that the recommended size for the large cover image is 512H x 800W. Whatever I do, it chops off the top and bottom. I'm doing a graphic for somebody, and I wanted it to fit correctly so all the details are shown. I need advice.

It's 768 x 1200 now. Does that help? Gives you a few hundred more pixels to play with anyhow.

Also, depending on what software you're using to resize it and how big the original image is, try cropping to the right ratio (768 x 1200 is about 1:1.54) and then resizing to get to the right size.

Thanks great. I'll give that a whirl.

Still doing it.

Found it works perfectly now.

There's one caveat to this situation. You make a beautiful graphic crisp and clear. You upload it; it looks great. Then, when you refresh the page, the graphic has a slight blur. This site is downgrading the resolution.

Quote by Spartan111

There's one caveat to this situation. You make a beautiful graphic crisp and clear. You upload it; it looks great. Then, when you refresh the page, the graphic has a slight blur. This site is downgrading the resolution.

To about 23% of the original without regard to its upload size. On a phone, it make small difference, but on a full size laptop or desktop monitor, it is very evident.

Quote by kistinspencil

To about 23% of the original without regard to its upload size. On a phone, it make small difference, but on a full size laptop or desktop monitor, it is very evident.

Thank you. It's frustrating.

The squishing is frustrating when you've gone to the effort of making a crystal sharp image. It's like making a beautifully engineered piece of music and having someone play it back as an MP3 at 128kbps where it smooshes the cymbals and muddies the bass.

They have dialled back the compression since we first moved here. In the early days it was so harsh that small text was illegible. But I get the need to save server space (and hence costs on storage and bandwidth) so it's a necessary evil in some respects.

Quote by WannabeWordsmith

The squishing is frustrating when you've gone to the effort of making a crystal sharp image.

Thanks. I understand perfectly. Back in the late 1970s, I was an R&D tech for Codex Corporation in Mansfield, MA, USA. We developed the equipment for 24 servers to be transmitted through a multiplexer, now known as a "router," over a 9600-baud modem. It's amazing how the Internet has evolved. $40K of equipment reduced to $29.95. with free shipping. Now, when it breaks the throwaway, back then, you troubleshoot down to chip level to see where the noise is coming from with an oscilloscope.

Thanks