Facebook image quality

I've seen Facebook's image quality mentioned on this forum and others, so I wrote a brief article about it:

Let's cut Facebook some slack!

I hope it clears a few things up.

Wow, thanks! That was very helpful.

Nice Damien...

I hope FB themselves pick up on it and maybe it will save a lot of wailing and lamenting!

Pffft... Whatever.

Facebook sucks and you, I, and everyone else that knows any better, know it too.

I wouldn't cut FB any slack, even if that slack was about to bury me.

I think if Flickr can manage, or if Getty can manage, then FB can too.

If FB got rid of the stupid music app stuff, the dumb flash games, and the lame ass other crap, chats, etc.. they'd have plenty of room for higher quality jpgs.

Maybe they need to buy a server or two, eh? How bout a few sticks of memory?

Pfftt..

Oh c'mon Todd...

What's it take for us to re-size and do a quick USM pass? Five more seconds?

I'll grant you though that wanting to do any "high volume" posting on FB does make for a bunch of little 600x images lying around. On the other hand, FB is the last place I'd ever want to put a quality image. You're just asking to have it ripped off and re-distributed at will.

Smaller is better...really.

word... i figured that out too - but didnt know the exact 604 pixel spec - i was just going for an 800 long side default... thanks!

nice writeup, thanks!

Totally agree and great writeup/explanation. It's not a photo-sharing site anyway, they just provide the ability to help share some moments with friends. Use a dedicated photo-sharing site if you want the bigger/better quality image hosting service. No?

troypiggo wrote in post #9334711
Use a dedicated photo-sharing site if you want the bigger/better quality image hosting service. No?

Bingo.

[/THREAD]

Glad people liked the article.

troypiggo wrote in post #9334711
Use a dedicated photo-sharing site if you want the bigger/better quality image hosting service. No?

While I agree with the principle here, the fact is, photographers are using Facebook, you can't deny it. You want to get your photos where people will see them, and Facebook is where the crowds are.

^^^ Truth ^^^

I see a very noticeable spike in traffic after announcing an addition to my Zen with a couple of appropriate teaser shots. Being able to link from Zen to FB is also nice!

Damo77 wrote in post #9337843
Glad people liked the article.


While I agree with the principle here, the fact is, photographers are using Facebook, you can't deny it. You want to get your photos where people will see them, and Facebook is where the crowds are.

YUP!! I set up a FB page about 3 months ago to "learn the ropes" before setting up a FB page for my photography. I am amazed at how quickly word spreads even when NOT trying to spread the word. I had already decided that for every photo gallery I put up on FB I am going to provide a Link on FB to the Full size photo gallery on my site. That way I can get all those "Your Friend was tagged in a Photo" messages directed at my FB page and they can still find the better image. Thanks for the write up. I plan to start uploading and tagging images in the next week or two. Knowing what size to resize to will be very helpful!!

Damo77 wrote in post #9337843
While I agree with the principle here, the fact is, photographers are using Facebook, you can't deny it. You want to get your photos where people will see them, and Facebook is where the crowds are.

Sorry, I don't mean to belabour the point, but see below. I understand attracting the widest audience you can, but use FB as it is intended - keeping friends up to date, social networking. Post some teasers, smaller images and link to a proper, dedicated image hosting site/gallery.

If photographers use a social networking site as an image hosting site, they can't very well complain about the image quality.

I'm not trying to be argumentative. The article you wrote is spot on. I just wanted to make my above points clear.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #9337854
I see a very noticeable spike in traffic after announcing an addition to my Zen with a couple of appropriate teaser shots. Being able to link from Zen to FB is also nice!

Yes, but FB isn't your primary gallery. As you said, you post some teasers there and you notice a spike on your Zen site. That's where you host your quality images. Teasers don't have to be the highest quality.

troypiggo wrote in post #9338903
Yes, but FB isn't your primary gallery. As you said, you post some teasers there and you notice a spike on your Zen site. That's where you host your quality images. Teasers don't have to be the highest quality.

Fair point, but that's no reason not to make the FB images look their best - and that's what my article was about. I'm glad you liked it.

I like it when people agree with me. It means they're right too. Hahaha.