Skip to main content
Participating Frequently
December 12, 2020
Answered

export issues for LinkedIn - poor quality type

  • December 12, 2020
  • 2 replies
  • 405 views

Hi! Hoping someone can help me out here... I'm trying to post a LinkedIn graphic I created for a client, and no matter what I try the photo in the background looks fine, but the type looks bitmapped and unclear. The original graphic was made in InDesign, but I've remade it in Photoshop & Illustrator, too. I've exported it at a vatiety of dimensions and DPIs, and they all look relatively the same - I've attached a screenshot from LinkedIn. Each file I upload looks fine on my computer, but terrible online. My client is freaking out. Anyone have any ideas for me? I've been at this for a while now and am out of ideas. Thanks!

This topic has been closed for replies.
Correct answer Leslie Moak Murray

Those appear to be normal jpeg artifacts. Here is a useful article on this topic, which is essential knowledge for me in my sideline as a stock photographer (link below):

In order to provide a smooth experience for the website, the JPEG should be compressed first. When you download the JPEG file again, JPEG compression artifacts and image noise effects the quality of photos.

...JPEG artifacts are caused by compression saved in JPEG files. JPEG Artifacts are the blocky or blotchy areas of an image. JPEG Artifacts are the results of aggressive data compression or conversion between different formats cause the discard of some image data.

https://www.widsmob.com/tips/jpeg-artifacts.html 

2 replies

D Fosse
Community Expert
Community Expert
December 12, 2020

Indeed. Jpeg is the worst possible choice for graphics and text. Artifacts are unavoidable, particularly around hard edges (like text). The jpeg algorithm is strictly intended for continuous-tone photographs, not hard-edge graphics.

 

You should always use PNG whenever text is involved.

keem_cAuthor
Participating Frequently
December 12, 2020

Thanks, D Fosse. I agree, I tried both jpegs and pngs and both were unacceptable to the client! This one's tough!

Leslie Moak Murray
Community Expert
Leslie Moak MurrayCommunity ExpertCorrect answer
Community Expert
December 12, 2020

Those appear to be normal jpeg artifacts. Here is a useful article on this topic, which is essential knowledge for me in my sideline as a stock photographer (link below):

In order to provide a smooth experience for the website, the JPEG should be compressed first. When you download the JPEG file again, JPEG compression artifacts and image noise effects the quality of photos.

...JPEG artifacts are caused by compression saved in JPEG files. JPEG Artifacts are the blocky or blotchy areas of an image. JPEG Artifacts are the results of aggressive data compression or conversion between different formats cause the discard of some image data.

https://www.widsmob.com/tips/jpeg-artifacts.html 

keem_cAuthor
Participating Frequently
December 12, 2020

Thanks so much, Ponytail. I agree - I think they're normal artifacts, possibly enhanced by the type & color combo. I'm going to have to ask the client if we can change them.