It may just be me, but when I compare these images, the one with no size change looks much better:
No size change:
Size change (l):
Size change (img tag):
Why does the img tag look so much better than the l extension to me?
-
2Because your browser is better at resizing things than Imgur is. That "large" image that Imgur generated (which only actually shaves off 2 pixels from the width and height of the original image) cuts off a whole 13KB from the image's size. Lots of compression and quality loss by using that image.– animuson StaffModCommented May 24, 2015 at 17:37
-
@animuson Ahh. Is there a way to resize that looks good on bigger displays, without the img tag?– TimCommented May 24, 2015 at 17:39
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
As animuson said, using the imgur options l,m,s invokes aggressive image compression in addition to resizing. If this is not desirable, the options are:
Do nothing, let the image be as large as the website allows (so it will be browser-resized to the width of the post area).
Use
<img src=" " width=" ">tag.Resize the image yourself prior to posting.
-
As for 1 and 2, see also Please do something to encourage people to scale down their giant heavyweight photos and Can automatic loading of giant images be solved?– ArjanCommented Jun 28, 2015 at 6:52
Because setting a width to img tag doesn't resize the image (unless the specified width is greater then th width of actual image), but just scales it, to fit the frame in pixels you want. However this doesn't change the image size in pixels. You can see it by posting (or embedding elsewhere; that's not SE-related) a large image using <img src="src-there" width="some-small-width"> and then zooming in or dragging the image to your desktop. You'll see the image doesn't get pixelated unless you reach the full size by zooming.
Imgur actually resizes the image, i.e. decreases the size in pixels.
