said 1 year, 2 months ago:
@clusterwebdesign the image size has always been something of debate. It has never made sense to me to use a high res image of 300dpi on a site that uses compression.
The first thing that usually gets done with images on auto compression is to set the resolution to 72dpi since that has been the resolution of computer screens for years (they’re capable of higher these days, but 72dpi is still the standard) and to take an image from 300dpi to 72dpi would require a great amount of compression. When you think of it like this, if the goal is 72dpi and you use an image at 72dpi, the only thing left to adjust would be file size, and if that file size is within the limits of the upload requirements then no compression would be needed.
However, Facebook hasn’t made anything public about how it compresses, and there are reports that at any resolution of the original file, you will see low quality. Some people will upload a .png because it is a lossless format with the highest possible resolution accepted by Facebook, but I have also read of compression issues going that route too.
Bottom line I guess, if the process you’re using is working then don’t change it and I only offered up this post in the event someone uses the 300dpi recommendation and doesn’t see favorable results.
My habits come form web design where I have always strived to reduce the files to the lowest size while keeping the highest quality possible, and always at 72dpi. So far I haven’t seen any issues with images I post to Facebook.