You’ve got all the great tools to create engaging images for social media. You know what the brain loves about visuals and how to build something beautiful to drive engagement. You’re all set to make something great!

One last thing: How exactly should your image look so it fits in the News Feed, timeline, or stream?

There’s so much to consider in creating great images for social media—for me, the size and shape tend to get locked in before I even realize what’s happened. Yet the size and shape—the height, width, and orientation—are the elements that most influence how an image will appear in a social media stream.

Once you’ve found your ideal image sizes, we’d love to help schedule and analyze your posts — so you can drive more social traffic and engagement in less time.

 width=

Fortunately, there’re some answers out there on how to create ideal images that show up consistently great in your audience’s timelines. We’ve collected all the answers here, along with our favorite two templates to fit any network. 

ideal-image-sizes

Ideal image sizes for social media

Image sizes are a huge topic to cover.

There’re ideal image sizes for cover photos and profile pictures, Facebook ads and Twitter cards. Several in-depth blog posts have tackled an overview for what’s best in all these many different spots. Here are two of my favorites:

Most of the major social media channels like Facebook and Twitter now give you added control over how your profile picture and cover photo look. You get some really neat tools to resize and scale these pictures until they’re pixel perfect.

Here’s the process for a Facebook cover photo, for example.

fb-cover

For ideal sizes on cover photos and profile pictures, I’d highly recommend the sites mentioned above. They’ve got it all covered.

I’d love for this post to focus specifically on the social media images you share with your updates, either as image attachments or as links.

Looking for a particular social platform? Try clicking one of these categories below to jump to the relevant section:

The best sizes for sharing images on social media

We’ve long been interested in the impact of social media images for engagement, retweets, clicks, and more. We found that tweets with images receive 150 percent more retweets than those without.

One of the big questions for me is how you get an engaging image to look its best when it’s in a stream, timeline, or News Feed?

What’s the best—and maybe even the easiest—way to go about it?

In general, here are the best sizes for sharing images on social media. (Click on any link here to jump to the details for a specific network.)

Facebook – 1,200 x 628

Twitter – 1,024 x 512

LinkedIn – 700 x 400

Google+ – 800 x 1,200

Pinterest – 735 x 1,102

Instagram – 1,080 x 1,080

By the way: I cover five unique and secret ways to include images in your updates on day 9 of our email course on social media strategies. I’d love to share them with you, too! You can join that course for free here.

Our two favorite image size templates that cover most networks

In experimenting with the fastest, easiest way to create images we know will work well in social media feeds, we came across a couple of image sizes that became our go-tos: one size for horizontal (landscape) images and one for vertical (portrait) images.

  • Horizontal (landscape) – 1,024 x 512
  • Vertical (portrait) – 800 x 1,200

Note: If you’d like to grab either of these as a Canva template, we’d love to make this easy for you. Click here for the horizontal template; click here for the vertical template.

One of the simplest ways we’ve found for creating the 1,024 x 512 pixel images is to use Pablo. You can create an image in under 30 seconds and share directly to Twitter, Facebook, and Buffer.

We use the horizontal size for sharing to Facebook and Twitter.

We use the vertical size for sharing to Google+ and Pinterest.

The horizontal size, as you’ll read below, fits perfect for Twitter’s 2:1 aspect ratio. The fit isn’t quite spot on for Facebook, yet we’ve found that it’s close enough where no important bits get cropped when Facebook resizes things.

If you prefer to have a square image size to go along with the portrait and landscape orientations, Constant Contact has some good recommendations for what they’ve used successfully.

  • Square – 1200 x 1200 (share to Facebook and LinkedIn)
  • Landscape – 1200 x 627 (share to Facebook and Twitter)
  • Portrait – 736 x 1128 (share to Pinterest and Google+)

Ideal image sizes for Facebook posts


The orientation of your image—whether it’s horizontal (landscape), vertical (portrait), or square—will determine which dimensions Facebook uses to show your image.

If you upload a square image to share, it will be 470 pixels square, the maximum allowable size in a Facebook feed. This’ll be the case no matter what size square you upload, be it an 800 x 800 image or a 400 x 400 image (the smaller images might appear a bit blurry when they are sized up to 470 pixels square).

facebook square

If you upload a horizontal (landscape) image, it will be scaled to 470 pixels wide and the height will be adjusted accordingly.

facebook post wide

Landscape images smaller than 470 pixels wide could appear at less than the 470-pixel width, aligned left with whitespace to the right of the image.

If you upload a vertical (portrait) image, it will be scaled to a height of 394 pixels, aligned to the left, with white space to the side. The adjusted width will be relative to the 394 pixels. For instance, if you upload a 500 x 700 image, Facebook will resize it to 281 x 394 pixels.

portrait facebook dimensions

If you plan on sharing multiple images in the same Facebook post, there’re some great insights at Have Camera Will Travel that cover all the various options that ensue here.

Sharing links to Facebook (and the images that come with them)

If you share a link to Facebook, the image associated with the link can be displayed in a number of ways. Again, all depends on the image size (pixel width and height) and shape (orientation).

Images previews for shared links are scaled to fill a box of 470 pixels wide by 246 pixels tall.

facebook featured image size

When choosing an image to go along with a link, Facebook looks at the Open Graph tags for a page, specifically the og:image tag, which specifies the image that Facebook should use when sharing in the News Feed.

You can add the og:image tag manually into the <head> section on every page of your website, or you can try out a plugin like Yoast SEO for WordPress, which handles the code and implementation for you. (We’re big fans of the Yoast plugin for the Buffer blog.)

If you are creating an image to be used in the og:image tag for your link, keep in mind that anything outside of 470 x 246 pixels will be cropped from the top and bottom in order to fit.

facebook crop top bottom

Additionally, if the link you share does not have the proper og:image tags installed or the image in the tag is not large enough, Facebook will not display it full-width. A thumbnail image will be placed in a small box to the left of the link text.

For most all image orientations—square, horizontal (landscape), and vertical (portrait)— the thumbnail will be scaled and cropped to fit a 158 x 158-pixel square.

facebook thumbnail size

In certain cases, very tall images (like infographics, for instance) will have 158-pixel width and 237-pixel height.

facebook tall thumbnail

What we’ve found to be the best solution for creating and sharing images to Facebook is to build an image that is 1024 x 512. While this doesn’t quite fit the dimensions above perfectly, it is large enough to look great on retina displays (where the pixel density is greater) and large enough so as to fit with the full-width areas in the News Feed.

(And as you’ll see below, this image size is ideal for Twitter as well.)

Ideal image sizes for tweets


Until very recently, Twitter images appeared in the timeline at 506 pixels wide by 253 pixels tall. However, images now appear uncropped, so you can experience and present them as they were meant to be viewed.

Here’s a quick before and after snapshot of how images are displayed on Twitter:

new_look_for_twitter.com_photos_1

(Note: Uploading an image that is smaller than 506 pixels x 253 pixels will result in whitespace to the right of the image.)

 

Twitter also allows you to upload up to four images to each tweet. And instead of display them all in an equal grid, you can now feature on particular image:

new_look_for_twitter.com_photos_2

Twitter share image size

When a link is shared, Twitter pulls in a bunch of meta information from your website including the title, description, and a feature image. Here’s an example:

Twitter typically pulls in the image that’s specified within the post’s metadata. If the size of image isn’t right for the, it will sometimes distort and not look great.

With Twitter is best to use an image that’s 1024px x 512px in dimension.

(At Buffer we use the Yoast SEO WordPress plugin mentioned above to specify which images should be shared to Twitter.)

Image sizes for Twitter cards

Images are also present in each of the nine different Twitter Cards. If you’re interested in trying out something like a lead generation card or a product card, AgoraPulse does a great job of breaking down the images sizes for each type of card. I’d like to get a bit deeper into a couple of specific ones that seem key for content sharing.

  • Summary card
  • Summary card with large image

Summary cards show a headline, description, link, and photo when you share a url from a site that contains the appropriate Twitter Cards code. All this information is pulled via HTML tags, often the same ones that are being used by Facebook to display links.

(The Yoast SEO WordPress plugin mentioned above also includes support for Twitter Cards.)

Each type of summary card contains a thumbnail or featured image.

For summary cards:

The image must be a minimum size of 120px by 120px and must be less than 1MB in file size.

For an expanded tweet and its detail page, the image will be cropped to a 4:3 aspect ratio and resized to be displayed at 120px by 90px.

The image will also be cropped and resized to 120px by 120px for use in embedded tweets.

twitter cards small thumb

Update: Small-image Twitter Cards now use a size of 109 pixels by 82 pixels, not the 120px x 90px mentioned above.

For summary cards with large images:

Images for this Card should be at least 280px in width, and at least 150px in height. Image must be less than 1MB in size.

All images for the large-image cards will be scaled to fit a width of 480 pixels. So landscape and portrait images will be resized to 480 wide and however many pixels tall (there doesn’t seem to be a maximum or a minimum here). Square images will be resized to 480 x 480 square.

Any image smaller than 480 pixels will appear aligned to the left with whitespace filling the empty space to the right.

twitter card large summary

Update: Large-image Twitter Cards now use a width of 506 pixels, not the 480-pixel width mentioned above.

One thing that’s interesting to note here is where the images get cropped. For the basic summary cards, photos will be cropped in the following ways:

  • Square and portrait images will be cropped from the bottom up and not from the sides.
  • Landscape images will be cropped from the outside in, and not from the top or bottom.

For the summary cards with large images, there don’t appear to be any noticeable crops.

If you’re curious how your images might look with Twitter Cards, you can enter your link into Twitter’s free card validator to get a quick preview.

Ideal image sizes for LinkedIn posts


When you share links and articles to LinkedIn, the thumbnail photos appear at a maximum of 180 pixels wide by 110 pixels tall.

linkedin thumbnail

If you upload an image directly, the image will appear at a maximum width of 350 pixels. The height of the image—whether square, landscape, or portrait—will be scaled to fit the new width. For example, a 700 x 500 image will be scaled to 350 x 250.

linkedin large upload

One outlier among these standard sizes is for LinkedIn’s Showcase Pages, a feature that allows companies to create pages based on offshoots of their brand (for instance, Adobe created pages for Adobe Creative Cloud, Adobe Marketing Cloud, etc.)

On these pages, thumbnail and featured images for links appear either at the standard size of 180 x 110 or at a larger size of 442 x 248.

linkedin company showcase page

LinkedIn uses the same Open Graph tags as Facebook and other social networks. If you’ve got your site well-optimized for Facebook links, then you should be good to go for LinkedIn as well.

(There’re a few neat ideas from SmashingBoxes as far as LinkedIn thumbnail workarounds if Open Graph tags don’t seem to be a possibility for you.)

One additional way to share content on LinkedIn is by publishing articles that appear on people’s home pages via LinkedIn Pulse. LinkedIn built a substantial publishing platform for this content, which includes the ability to add featured images to the articles.

In the home page feed, the featured image on a Pulse update is 180 pixels wide by 110 pixels tall—same as it is for all link thumbnails. If the story is placed in the recommended reading list below a featured Pulse story, the thumbnail will be 70 x 37.

linkedin pulse homefeed

Inside the Pulse page, a list of articles runs along the left-hand column. The image thumbnails here are 70 x 70 square images.

The featured image at the top of the article is 700 pixels wide by 400 pixels tall.

(Cropping for these images occurs from the outside in, so the very middle of the picture will be what’s displayed in the smaller thumbnails.)

li-pulse

Ideal image sizes for Google+ posts


When you share links and articles to Google+, the featured photos appear at a maximum width of 426 pixels. The height scales accordingly.

mcdonalds g+ portrait g+

Similarly to the other social channels mentioned here, Google+ pulls in images from URLs using Open Graph tags. If the image used in the Open Graph is not at least 426 pixels wide or if Open Graph tags do not exist for a url, Google+ may instead place a thumbnail image to the left of the update. This thumbnail is 150 x 150 square.

If you upload an image directly to Google+, the image will appear at a maximum width of 426 pixels also (same as above). The height of the image will scale to fit according to the new width.

Clicking through to the update URL, the image will be 506 pixels wide, maximum, with a height that scales accordingly.

url page g+

If the image is smaller than the 346-pixel width, Google+ places the image centered on the update with white space to each side.

One other way that Google+ may display photos is as a full-width image that spans across both columns of the Google+ stream. These images are 886 pixels wide. The height scales accordingly.

gopro full width g+

Ideal image sizes for Pinterest Pins


There are a couple of different places where a Pinned image can appear on Pinterest.

In the feed, Pinterest images have a width of 235 pixels. The height scales accordingly.

pinterest size

If you click to expand a Pinned image, the image will have a width of 736 pixels. The height, again, scales accordingly.

pinterest width

Beyond these two places, the other spots that you might find a pin include the cover for Pinterest boards and in side ads for recommended and related Pins.

According to Pinterestthe best aspect ratio for Pinterest images is between 2:3 and 1:3.5, with a minimum width of 600 pixels. 

So this might raise the question (one that I’ve asked a lot before): What is aspect ratio?

It’s how the width and the height of an image relate to one another.

For instance:

A 2:3 aspect ratio could be

  • 600 pixels wide by 900 pixels tall
  • 800 pixels wide by 1,200 pixels tall

A 1:3.5 aspect ratio could be

  • 600 pixels wide by 2,100 pixels tall
  • 800 pixels wide by 2,800 pixels tall

Pins with an aspect ratio greater than 1:3.5 will be truncated in the feed, cropped from the bottom up with a small “Expand Pin” link covering the bottom. If a user clicks to expand, the cropped portion of the image appears.

crop

Ideal image sizes for Instagram photos


Instagram used to be all about the square image. However, you can now upload landscape (horizontal) or portrait (vertical) photos as well. Here are the best sizes for Instagram’s three image types:

  • Square Image: 1080px in width by 1080px in height
  • Vertical Image: 1080px in width by 1350px in height
  • Horizontal Image: 1080px in width by 566px in height

Square

ig-square

Vertical

ig-vertical

Horizontal

ig-horizontal

The thumbnail photos that appear on one’s profile page are 161 x 161.

instagram thumbnails

The images in the header are either 204 x 204 (for the smaller featured images) or 409 x 409 (for the larger featured image).

instagram featured

Summary

I hope these image size overviews might be useful for you. We continue to learn lots about what’s best for all the different social networks, and I’ll be happy to continue updating this post with all our latest findings.

(I’m also eager to experiment with mobile sizes as well!)

Is there anything we can add to this resource to make it more useful for you? What has your experience been with sharing different image sizes to social media?

I’d love to hear from you in the comments!

Oh, and by the way: Buffer can help you schedule and analyze your posts — so you can drive more social traffic and engagement in less time.

 width=

Image sources: IconFinder, Pablo, Startup Stock Photos, Blurgrounds

Looking for a better way to share on social media?

Schedule, publish & analyze your posts across the top social networks, all in one place.

Get started for free
Written by Kevan Lee

Director of marketing at Buffer, the social media publishing tool for brands, agencies, and marketers. We’ve got a new podcast! 🍟

  • Albert Freeman

    Excellent post, as ever. I shall be sharing and bookmarking this.

    However, Twitter doesn’t always seem to play by the rules you’ve observed. There are two issues:

    1) I don’t think Twitter always crops images “from the top and bottom, leaving the middle of the image as-is.” Twitter sometimes seems to intuit faces or text in images, and it crop what it thinks is the best section to display in the feed.

    2) It is, unfortunately, not true that “any size within the 2:1 ratio—the image will appear fully in tact in the Twitter stream”. I created an image using Pablo but it still got cropped in the Twitter feed.

    • Hi Albert!

      Thanks so much for the extra information for Twitter! I’d love to update the post here with your findings. And sorry for the Pablo image not fitting perfectly. I’d love to dig into that for you and see how we might be able to improve. Was it maybe this tweet where you noticed the cropping? https://twitter.com/AlbFreeman/status/574607861965287425

      • Albert Freeman

        You’re welcome. And yes, that was the Pablo image in question. Take a look at the replies to that tweet, and you will see my screenshot of how the image appeared cropped in in the Twitter feed.

        • Rob Abis

          Ah, I believe Albert is referring to the Twitter preview pane. Here’s an article of how that works: http://bit.ly/1F03OYs . Basically, Twitter intelligently crops so that it centers dominant images which include high contrast objects and faces.

          • Albert Freeman

            Thanks Rob, that’s the best explanation I’ve seen. I still don’t think it is 100% accurate though. I’ve measured recent preview pane images on the Twitter iOS app and the aspect ratio has been 1.8:1 not 2:1.

          • Ooh, great info Rob! Thanks so much! I’d love to add this to the post. 🙂

    • Yup, you are right Albert. Twitter has its own algorithm which is not public that they use to display images. We at http://followedapp.com/ have figured a way to make sure the images appear right. Check images on my Twitter profile and you will see that Twitter plays nice with those. Check http://twitter.com/dinwal

  • Wow, you’re not a writer, you’re an epic writer 🙂 Thanks for mentioning our blog post about Twitter cards’ visuals, appreciated!

    • Thanks so much, Emeric! Great to hear from you. You all have created a really wonderful resource!

  • John Chapman

    beware of uploading a 1024 x 512 image to Twitter if you have a slow connection. Twitter may time out before the upload is complete. The answer in that case is to upload the image via Buffer which doesn’t appear to time out.

    • Thanks so much for this tip, John!

  • hwarner

    Hi there. This is really useful, thanks. I’d be interested to know though, what do you advise re optimising images for retina screens. I double the dimensions for my website where, as I understand it, CSS is used to determine which version to show. Do any social media platforms accommodate this or are they yet to offer it?

    • Hi there! Thanks for the comment. Great question. From what I’ve experienced, social media platforms do accommodate retina screens and will display images at the greater pixel density. This is one reason why we aim for the 1,024×512 images on Twitter, to maximize retina as much as possible. 🙂

  • Margot Größlich

    Thanks for sharing this. Great post! 🙂

  • gburrell

    Can you comment on adding multiple photos to Facebook? In a “status” post rather than a photo post, the multiple images are shrunk to various sizes and shapes but I’m having trouble predicting the outcome. Sometimes I end up with three tiny squares, sometimes a large rectangle with two smaller squares. Advice?

    • Hi there! Thanks for the question! I found some great advice here at the Have Camera Will Travel blog: lhttp://havecamerawilltravel.com/photographer/images-photos-facebook-sizes-dimensions-types

      From what I understand, both the orientation of the image (portrait vs landscape vs square) and the pixel height and width can impact how it appears in a collage. Hope this helps shine some light on this one for you!

  • Francisco

    This is a very helpful breakdown but I believe there is one “gotcha” for the Pinterest section: from what I have found, the max width for expanded pins on Pinterest is 736px, not 660px as you stated in the post. This is according to what my Chrome Dev tools are telling me the size is :). Am I misunderstanding something though?

    • Ah, yep! Thanks so much for noticing this, Francisco! Looks the same on my end in the Chrome Dev tools as well. I’ll hop right in and update the post!

      • Francisco

        You bet! Glad I was able to help 😀

  • SEObangkoknet

    An excellent resource for social networking images.

    One small correction regarding Pinterest 1:3.5 aspect ratio:

    ‘800 pixels wide’ instead of ‘400 pixels wide by 2,800 pixels tall’

    Thanks

    • Thanks for the comment! And great catch. I’ll fix up my math there. 🙂 Really appreciate your sharp eye!

  • Alicia

    This is awesome! I’m looking forward to the mobile sizes information as well. I’m noticing that for LinkedIn specifically in the iPhone 6 app, image post size is much much wider and narrower than the dimensions for the web. I’m not sure if this the case for other iPhones or Android devices.

  • Mark

    It’s great to know the various sizes at which LinkedIn images are ultimately displayed. But it doesn’t really help in terms of what sizes are best for submission of images. For example, when making a new Post on LI, you are told that the recommended image size is 698 x 400 pixels. But upload an image at this size that needs the full image area to look right and you’ll find that the sides of the image are removed when it appears on your profile page. So you may have characters missing off text or whatever. And the same issue when the Post is shared by Connections and same again when content is shared on a Company page. Frankly, it’s a real mess and I’m finding it impossible to produce an image that looks good in each of the various guises. Any comments?

    • Really interesting one, Mark. I’m not sure I have an answer for you here, though I’d love to investigate and see what I can find!

    • lokkomotion

      I’ve noticed the same thing, if a person (profile) share a post with an image from a Company page it its crack.

  • Mahathir Kawi

    Thanks sir for your ultimate sharing. I have facing this issue since a few years before, only today i can solve it.

  • john

    The Instagram info is NOT correct. The correct answer is 640×640. Why you state that you should upload at 1200×1200 for Instagram when it doesn’t display more than 640×640 is beyond me. Do your homework.

    • Hey there John, you’re absolutely right; so sorry to have given you this bad experience! Going to fix this one right up; really appreciate the heads up here!

      • Rachel Jackson

        Thank you for this great post! 🙂 Just a reminder to please update the Instagram size to 640×640 because I got super confused after reading this post — before I did some research and then eventually saw John’s comment. 🙂 Thanks, John & Courtney!

        • Thanks for the nudge, Rachel! This is all fixed up now. Sorry for any confusion I caused there!

          • Rachel Jackson

            No problem! Thank YOU for doing all this research for us! And wow you’re a speedy responder! you = thebomb.com 😄

        • The dimensions are different again! 🙂
          1080×1080.

  • MichaelaJayne

    This has been helpful! Thanks I’ve gone back and used it as a resource a few times. I would love a follow up article on proven successful images used for twitter or instagram campaigns. These style guides are nice and it’s an easy starting point but… what next? What makes an image great with text. Specifically geared towards someone (not unlike myself) who is working in social media but doesn’t have a design background. Thanks!

  • Hi Kevan,
    Regarding the summary and summary card with large image sizes, I find that the size of the summary card thumbnail is 109 x 82 and the size of the summary card with large image is 506 x 253. I don’t get the 120 x 90 or the 480 x scaled height part in this post. Can you or anyone else throw some light on this? Thanks!

    • Hi there Priyanka! Thanks so much for the comment, sorry for any confusion I’ve caused here! The Twitter Cards image dimensions I’ve used came from this post on Agora Pulse (http://www.agorapulse.com/blog/all-twitter-image-sizes-best-practices) and personal testing, though I’ve just tested again and I see the same dimensions you’ve found here. I’ll be really happy to update the post with these new correct sizes. Thanks so much for finding this and alerting me!

      • Hi Kevan, Yes it would be helpful if you updated the dimensions :). Thanks!

      • Oh well! I see that you have already updated the post :). Thanks!

  • Martha

    This is terrific information… very through. I do have a question when I share links and articles to LinkedIn, the thumbnail photos appear at a maximum of 180 pixels wide by 110 pixels tall. I crop my photos to that dimension and they look fine sizewise, but they look grainy or unclear. Do you know what I’m doing wrong? Thanks!

    • Hi Martha! Thanks for the comment. Great question about the LinkedIn images. My best guess here is that LinkedIn might prefer to take a larger image and to scale it down to fit. I know sometimes this can be a useful way to make sure images look great on regular displays and retina displays. My suggestion might be to upload something double the pixel size and see how the clarity is then? I’d love to know how that works for you!

      • Kristina Hopkins

        I’m having a similar issue — Martha, did you try uploading an image at double the pixel size, and did that do the trick?

  • There seems to be a contradiction in this article – from the top section, it states the best size for Facebook should be 1,200 x 628 but in the FB section it states the best size is1024x512 – which is it?

    • Hi there James! Thanks for the comment. Sorry for any confusion I’ve caused there. I believe the absolute best FB image size would be the 1,200 x 628 size, particularly if it’s just FB you’re sharing to. We recommend the 1,024 x 512 size as that size also is ideal for Twitter, so we’re able to share to both places with the same image. (The 1,024 x 512 looks great on FB.) Hope that helps clear things up!

  • Hi Kevan,
    I also have another query. I find that the LinkedIn photo dimensions can be greater than 350 px wide. (When you upload a photo directly as a status update). When I uploaded a photo of dimensions 800×400, it got resized to 531×265.

  • Thanks for a great article Kevan! We’re new to Buffer, so can you help me understand why, when we use Buffer to post to LinkedIn, the images we’ve uploaded show up on with a title to the right that says simply ‘Photo’ and the caption above it in small gray lettering says ‘buffer-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com’. All other social media posts are fine. What are we doing wrong? See image…

    • jana

      Hi Stephen, I keep on seeing this too. Did you find a solution yet?

      • Nothing yet jana. We’re doing posts to LinkedIn manually at this point.

        • Loic Gonsolin

          Same for me.

          • Hi! I’m no expert on this topic at all – but thought maybe it could have something to do with ALT text? What happens when you rename the image on your website? Good luck with your issues. Cheers, Victoria

  • Alex Jennings

    Excellently written article, Kevan! Thanks for sharing this with us! I didn’t know that there were ideal imagine sizes for social media. There are a couple popular photo sites that I like posting on, so I’m glad that you’re teaching me about this! I think it’s interesting that tweets receive 150 percent more retweets with pictures in them than without! Here’s to better formatting my pictures!

    Alex Jennings | http://piccsy.com

  • Very useful. Did Twitter preview pics just get bigger? Also, will a Twitter preview show up as a link if the post is over a certain number of characters? See: https://twitter.com/HotSpringSpas/status/621386890239979520

  • Very helpful, Kevan. It’s the post that keeps on giving!

  • Instagram has recently pushed their maximum image size to 1080×1080 pixels, probably to cater for hi-res Retina screens.

  • Thanks for value info, helpful

  • is there any way to send images with the buffer app for os x? :S

  • Social Media & Video

    Hi. I have to say, that testing various sizes, (including those mentioned in this post) I find you get far, far better results if the long edge (lets hope it’s always landscape) is actually 2048 pixels. If this is not achievable, i.e. the image is not large enough, then you should opt for 960 pixels. With 2048 – you’ll get truly great images. Same image at 1024 – from my experience, not nearly as good. I wrote a blog about it, showing you how to resize effectively for those who don’t have photoshop. https://www.neilweightman.com/best_image_settings_for_facebook/ all this said. I do like this blog, I found it whilst researching information on Linkedin. Keep up the great work.

  • This is great! Any chance you’re going to include the new cover image for FB that includes the smaller profile image and large blue call to action? It’s a challenge to design when admins see it differently than the public. Thanks for keeping these guidelines current! Much appreciated!

  • the best image size for LinkedIn timeline is 530*390

  • WOW!! great post and tips, as always! Tks for share. And I am sharing NOW…

  • Aleks Siroki

    Hi Everyone!

    Kevan, thanks a lot. Really appreciate your work. I’ve bookmarked this page:) However, I have a question regarding the optimal image size for Google+. I spent 2 hours searching the internet for a solution to my problem and stumbled upon this wonderful site.

    Google has re-designed it’s Google+ platform and added couple of new features

    1. A multi-column layout. You’ll see one, two, or three columns of content depending on your screen size and orientation.

    2. Awesome-sized media. Photos and videos can fill the entire width of the stream, making it easier to scan, and nicer to look at.

    3. Delightful animations. The sharebox bounces, the menus slide, and the cards flip and fade — just to name a few.

    My Question is about 2. Awesome-sized media. I’ve uploaded an image for your to see.

    What size should it be to fill the entire width of the stream? I really tried everything from 1920 x 1080px to 5000 x 3500px, but with now luck – all images are going to one of the 3 columns, none of my images were transformed into an “Awesome-sized media” (fill the entire width of the stream).

  • While my blog has OpenGraph meta tags, is there a separate meta tag that I can add so Google+ picks up an 800×1200 image tailored for their network and not use the Facebook go:image ??

    • Chris Bowyer

      Google does it’s own thing a lot of the time, but you can try the following before adding Twitter and Facebook tags:

      <!– Required if not included with Open Graph and possibly best if title exceeds 95 characters i.e. –>

      <!– Required if not included with Open Graph and possibly best if description exceeds 297 characters i.e. –>

      <!– Required if not included with Open Graph i.e. –>

  • Digital Fairways

    This was really helpful. Thanks for the clear and concise info!

  • Spindle

    It says in this article that the ideal sizes for social sharing are:
    Horizontal (landscape) – 1,024 x 512
    Vertical (portrait) – 800 x 1,200

    I would recon that the landscape sizes would look nice on Facebook and Twitter, however linkedin is the odd one out with a thumbnail-like vertical ratio of 1:4. So for linkedin a vertical portrait image would be more appropriate.

    But is it then possible to define 2 images with only one opengraph metadata:image field?

  • Welcom my blogs http://pornopass24.com/free-brazzers-accounts-generator-v4-2/

    Very helpful, Kevan. It’s the post that keeps on giving!

  • @aNoviceMum

    The course button is not working; how can I get it?

  • l

    ll

  • Deniz Yılmaz

    Hello Kevan. Thanks for sharing!
    I am really struggling to find the image size for Tumblr blog and share it on FB, Linkedin and Twitter. Every image size i tried, fails in one of these mediums. Should i make different sized images for each social media channel? How can i do it, i can’t, because i am sharing the image that i used in blog post! Could not find an answer and i am about to loose my mind.
    Do you have an idea about what can be done?
    Thank you.

    • Chris

      Hey why don’t you check out http://www.adsvise.com/? It has all the specs & free psd’s for all social networks.

  • Chris Bowyer

    Unless I have missed something, when I checked the Twitter ‘summary’ image size using their validator (https://cards-dev.twitter.com/validator), images are resized to 125x125px, so, although the minimum size is 120x120px and I recall from an earlier experiment, that not being correct either, any image larger or smaller than 125x125px is not optimal. As for Retina Display and all that, I don’t know. Argh! Nothing like standardisation. If they all agreed on a standard share size, everyone would benefit.

  • Conci

    Thank you very much for your article Kevan, but I have a problem in registering for the free course.
    Can you help me to join please?
    Thanks

  • Dena McKitrick

    I tried to sign up for the free email course, and got the message: I’m so sorry! Something’s broken on our end. You’re welcome to leave me a comment and I’ll get on this!

  • Greete Eluri

    Hi Kevan – could I get the presentation about this or will there by another one? Thanks, Greete

  • Jose Antonio Morales

    Hey Kevan, great article. I’d like to receive the email training course but the form isn’t working.

  • Hi Kevan! I recognize this is quite an old post dating 2015, but this is a fantastic guide for me. Thank you. On another note, I was wondering if you’d be willing to share the specs for the images you include in your blog posts (titles, etc.) They’re a beautiful resolution and the page is loading quite rapidly. I’m using Pablo and then exporting the images to JPEG format. However, mine show up sort of blurry. Thanks for any tips! Victoria, LV Linguistics (Belgium)

    • @lvlinguistics:disqus,

      Bonjour Victoria. I’m not Kevan, but I’m a professional photographer, who enjoys and uses Buffer to update my social media profiles. The reason why your image(s) appears blurry could be one of these two:

      1. Let’s say for an ideal size for the image placeholder on your site (or profile) is X by Y pixels. Your original image should be by X by Y or larger. If your image is smaller than your site or profile typically upscale your image so fit the dimensions of the placeholder.

      2. The other possible reason for your blurry images is that your site—when uploading triggers compression algorithm on your JPEGS. This is commonly know as the “jaggies.”

      I don’t use Pablo and so I’m unfamiliar with its output formats. Determine if Pablo could output the images as PNGs. The format is what’s known as a “lossless” graphic format, while the ubiquitous JPEGS are known as “lossy” graphic format. If you’re seeing blurry images, see if using a larger image in Pablo would alleviate the oddity you’re experiencing. If that doesn’t work, perhaps the image was not focused properly at original capture.

      Four months have elapsed and I hope you found your solution. 🙂 I discovered this post from perusing the Buffer blog.

  • James Ng

    It said that I can’t get a free course

  • Christensen143

    Hi Kevan. The form for the course is broken. Can you help?

  • sevim

    Hello Kevan, really helpful article, but somehow I can’t apply for the free email course! Could you, please, tell me how could we fix this 🙂 Thank you in advance.

  • Em Gould

    This may need updating. Not a single image I’m seeing in my LinkedIn feed is displaying in a square.

  • Why do none of these social media image size guides ever explain why these social networks (specifically Facebook) scales the images down? Why recommend 1200×630 if they are just going to scale it down? Maybe I am missing something here but…..well, I am obviously missing something. It’s why I am asking. That and frustration. LOL LOL

    • Did you ever find out the answer?

      The way I interpret this is that it isn’t about the dimensions but the actual quality an image is exported/saved at. In Adobe CC for example, you can save an image at different qualities for the same dimension.

      I wonder then if there is a difference in final quality between a) Facebook scaling an image down (in dimensional size), and b) the final quality of an image (at the recommended dimensional size but saved at the highest quality) that Facebook then compresses.

      Any image compression experts in the house?

  • Peter Dykstra

    Great homage to Sprout Social’s cropping tool, Landscape.

  • Michael

    Hi there,
    Everyone is talking about 1024x512px for twitter but did someone try this size? It’s cut off on mobile… So update is needed on this

  • Once again Buffer has given me the information I needed in a direct and useful way. Thanks, much, Kevan!

    BTW, the podcasts are coming along wonderfully. Sound quality was greatly improved on the last one. You guys have great content. I always look forward to the next one.

  • victorbrodt

    Hmm, no date so it is just about impossible to tell if this is useful today. It would sure be nice if we could know if this is ‘still’ up to date. Things are not working well for me, trying to get an image sized for a FB link to website; no matter what I try seems to be re-sized and looks bad. The image that shows is 300 x 300 ….

  • Michael Mikho

    There are so many blog posts explaining this same exact thing, but it still downs’t work for me. I’ve tried everything under the sun. I’m uploading 1200×628 but still can’t get it to be a large photo.

    • Chris Bowyer

      What can’t you get it to be a large photo in?

  • Is there any reason why the 2048px wide standard set by Facebook isn’t used?
    https://www.facebook.com/help/266520536764594?helpref=uf_permalink