Resized images are pixelated (Feed, icons, profile banners etc)

Varka ~ 8 years ago updated by Insomniacovrlrd (tom smith) 8 years ago 9 1 duplicate

Images on the "feed" page (and many other places, it turns out) look pixelated from resizing, when the original image is small.

Example - this submission: https://beta.furrynetwork.com/artwork/414237/black-iron-tarkus-vday/

Full image .JPG (smaller than 2500x1500, so original sized):

Resized 750x350px preview for feed page:

Something weird is going on during resize. Any chance of a fix?


Under review

We've noticed a big issue with the algorithm used to make sample images for the feed (amongst other places); merging this into the main thread for it!

Duplicates 1

Something I reported earliy on before the forums happened. I'd love this to be fixed.

This really bothers me, I'm very picky on resize quality and usually upload a small version to websites so they don't autoresize my works and provide download link myself, but this doesn't seem to be possible here.

1) Only resize and use better algorithm for it (lanczos?) and don't compress jpeg's othewise, or do it very little.

2) Alternatively: let users upload the smaller file.

Something similar happens to my icon on the community tab aswell :o

Looks a bit like upscaling with 'box' algorithm.


As a quality snob, and knowing some artists are silly enough to not keep original files, in my opinion JPEG compression is probably the worst kind for distribution. PNG is 100% lossless, and for a number of artwork styles tends to be comparable in filesize unless you sacrifice quality. JPEG at any quality less than "pretty dang high" tends to get compression artifacts around sharp transitions (which there are a lot of in linework and other high contrast images) and really wasn't meant for artificial images (the P stands for "Photographic" after all).

Under review

We've noticed a big issue with the algorithm used to make sample images for the feed (amongst other places); merging this into the main thread for it!

I noticed that this post doesn't appear as 'under review' when you look at the title & topic search, eventhough you set that as it's state? :o


The JPEG compression and scaling algorithms are by far the number one things that keep me from wanting to use the site. As an artist, when I upload my art to a website, I want people to see it at the original quality or at least pretty darn close to it. Especially since many furry artists use a cartoony, flat style, artifacts can be all over their images. If this is intended to be a site for hosting artwork, this absolutely needs to be addressed.


would also like to chime in: the intense JPEG compression when actually viewing an artist's gallery not only degrades the quality of their work to the point of it looking like they don't know how to use a computer but also makes it difficult for the viewer to enjoy the work as the artist intended. as an art site, using JPEG like this is absolute nonsense


Echoing comments on the JPEG compression. It's a huge deterrent for me; a site intended for viewing art should actually display graphics well.


Was directed here after speaking with whatever poor soul mans the twitter.

I would honestly prefer pngs, as they support alpha channel as well as generally not having compression artifacts.

I was looking at some of my art that the importer delivered here, and noticed it was a bit artifacted. After comparing to the original, i noticed that while the file i was given by FN claims to be a .png by filename, it is in fact a .jpg. I assumed that hitting the download button would at least deliver the original file, but it just spit out the max res jpg, compression still present.

I would really appreciate it if the staff would find some way to improve this situation, as someone who draws a lot of pink/red things with black outlines, it's always really obvious when your compression's bad.