Facebook Link Thumbnail Image Dimensions [Reference]

2.6K Shares Facebook 1.7K Twitter 329 Buffer 134 Google+ 147 LinkedIn 86 Pin It Share 186 2.6K Shares ×

facebook link thumbnail dimensions 700x366 Facebook Link Thumbnail Image Dimensions [Reference]

[NOTE: Go here for a full reference of image dimensions of nine ad types across desktop and mobile!]

Facebook has made a change to link thumbnail image dimensions that will make them much more prominent.

This is a huge change. It’s an important change for any marketers looking to drive traffic to their websites. Did I mention this is a big deal?

Following is an overview of dimensions and text guidelines and limitations associated with Desktop News Feed, Mobile and Sidebar ads for link shares.

[Note: Much of this was pulled from Facebook's latest update to their Ads and Sponsored Stories Guide.]

1.91:1 Aspect Ratio

This is the main thing you need to know. The width of your image needs to be 1.91 times the height. When this is the case, it will scale nicely across Desktop News Feed, Mobile and Sidebar.

That’s the biggest change here, beyond the larger size for News Feed and Mobile. The aspect ratio is now consistent, no matter where you see the image.

Facebook recommends a pretty ridiculous 1200×627 pixel image. In most cases, unless you have a high definition image, this won’t be possible.

So your main goal should be an image that fits the largest dimensions possible. In this case, it’s mobile.

Desktop News Feed

facebook link thumbnail image dimensions desktop newsfeed Facebook Link Thumbnail Image Dimensions [Reference]

Following are Facebook’s recommendations:

  • Text: 500 Characters Max (remainder truncated)
  • Title: 1-2 Lines
  • Domain: 1 Line
  • Description: 2-3 Lines
  • Image Size: 400×209 pixels

If the thumbnail image isn’t at least 400×209 pixels, Facebook will resize it to 154×154 or 90×90. That’s a big difference!


facebook link thumbnail image dimensions mobile 395x525 Facebook Link Thumbnail Image Dimensions [Reference]

Following are Facebook’s recommendations:

  • Text: 110 Characters Max (remainder truncated)
  • Title: 1-2 Lines
  • Domain: 1 Line
  • Description: Up to 1 Line
  • Image Size: 560×292 pixels

If the thumbnail image isn’t at least 560×292 pixels, Facebook will resize it to 100×100.

I know what you’re thinking: Why is the mobile image bigger than the Desktop News Feed? My assumption is that this is first because of tablets. The second reason would be due to no mobile sidebar.


facebook link thumbnail image dimensions sidebar Facebook Link Thumbnail Image Dimensions [Reference]

Following are Facebook’s recommendations:

  • Text: 90 Characters Max (remainder truncated)
  • Link Title: 25 Characters Max
  • Domain: 1 Line
  • Image Size: 100×72 pixels

In case you’re wondering, no… There are no changes here!

What This Means for You

First, it’s time to start optimizing the featured image that goes along with your articles and blog posts! The width of the featured images in my blog posts has been 700 pixels since my redesign. Therefore, I am now going to a 700×366 pixel standard size.

Second, you should optimize any link posts that you plan to turn into an ad. As stated earlier, the image needs to be at least 560×292 pixels. You should also get to the point in your text within the first 90 characters (or more if you won’t promote on the sidebar).

What Do You Think?

What do you think of this change? For quite a while now, I’ve been telling you to stop sharing links as photo shares or text updates. Now, you shouldn’t think twice!

Let me know your thoughts in the comments below!

2.6K Shares Facebook 1.7K Twitter 329 Buffer 134 Google+ 147 LinkedIn 86 Pin It Share 186 2.6K Shares ×
About Jon Loomer

Jon Loomer is a digital marketing consultant with a unique perspective on social media. He was introduced to Facebook in 2007 while with the NBA (back before Pages) and has been using Facebook for business ever since. Stay in touch by liking his Facebook Page (Jon Loomer Digital).

  • http://www.postplanner.com/ Scott Ayres

    Something for everyone to keep in mind is I’m noticing that when you use an app like Post Planner to post a link with the wide image it doesn’t show wide in the old version of the news feed, but if people have the new version of the news feed it does show wide. Which is rather goofy.. Good info Jon.

    • http://jonloomer.com/blog Jon Loomer

      Scott, are you suggesting we shouldn’t use PostPlanner? I KID!

      • http://www.postplanner.com/ Scott Ayres

        Of course not, but what I’m saying is the view is different when coming from any 3rd party app right now depending if the person has the “new” news feed.. Which I’m convinced no one will ever get!! I’ve seen it though and it’s magical!

      • D. da Silva

        I have to say that I am seeing a big difference in the amount of clicks and likes I´m getting… I am getting a lot of more likes on a link post but less clicks..

        Was this Facebook’s intention?

        You should do your link vs text vs photo clicks-on-link test again John. :o)

  • Bo Milbourn

    Awesome! Is this effective immediately for all users!

  • http://www.xing.to/hanssteup Hans Steup

    Thanks Scott for bringing this up yesterday and thanks Jon for making this ‘pinable’ :) Good advice to adjust blog pictures as well.

  • Mig Bravo

    This excites me.

  • lars

    mmmmm more traffic out of facebook and onto my site :)

  • http://ideagirlmedia.com/ Keri at Idea Girl Media


    I like the larger sized image. But I doubt people, in general, will be blogging and calculating, “Gee, my main image should be 1.91:1.” How did that ratio come to be? {I prefer the KISS method}

    Thanks for the dimensions — Surely will be helpful.

    This is great news for bloggers. But for Facebook Marketers, it seems like a lot of unfinished business out there before we’ve jumped to the next thing, IMHO.

    As always, great post – Your rock!


    • http://jonloomer.com/blog Jon Loomer

      Keri — They may not start calculating that aspect ratio, but they SHOULD!

      That ratio came about because the sidebar image was already using it.

  • http://www.savvyvegetarian.com/index.php Judith Kingsbury

    Are you saying that if my current images don’t have that ratio, or they aren’t the minimum size of 400 x 209, that FB will just show a tiny image? That I have to re-size my recipe pictures before I post on FB? This may seem like good news to you but it just seems like a lot more work to me!

    • http://jonloomer.com/blog Jon Loomer

      You don’t have to do anything, Judith. Old posts will continue to display the same size as before. If you want to benefit from the new sizes, you should either resize your images or adjust going forward.

      • http://www.savvyvegetarian.com/index.php Judith Kingsbury

        I discovered that I can upload a different photo in place of the small one, before posting, when I click on ‘upload image’ under the small pic Fortunately I have very large versions of all my recipe photos. Smaller would be ideal, but it still worked – I got a lovely big pic in one of my posts, with a link. I was happy about that, since re-sizing the pics in my recipes and blog posts is not an option – it would mess up my page formatting horribly. But I just tried it again, and although I was able to sub a different image, it didn’t come out really big this time. Will keep playing with it.

  • Michael

    This is really good Jon. For about 2 weeks now, I’ve been trying to calculate the proper image size for my promotional post ads. I’ve even moved several images into Photoshop to test various sizes I’ve been seeing. This clears up the confusion. Thanks!

  • https://corp.wishpond.com/ Nick @ Wishpond

    Thanks for this Jon. This is great news. Up until now we’ve been including images in our link posts to make them stand out more. The problem with this though is the image itself doesn’t link to the post, so we lose clicks to the post to ones that go to the Facebook photo lightbox.

    Also, I was just playing around with some test posts, and it seems as though Facebook is not completely restrictive in the aspect ratio guideline. I was able to make a post with the new format using an image that is 587 x 384 px (1.53 : 1 ratio). This will keep me from having to go into Photoshop for every blog post to get the sizing just right, like Michael did.

    • http://jonloomer.com/blog Jon Loomer

      Hey, Nick! Not completely restrictive, but do they crop the image? Always curious when they decide to do that.

      • https://corp.wishpond.com/ Nick @ Wishpond

        Yes, for the one I tried it cropped the top and bottom of the image.

        I’ve attached a screenshot of the Facebook post to the comment below, so you can compare (and test out) against the original image from the blog post (located under “2. The Poll”):


        • http://jonloomer.com/blog Jon Loomer

          Okay, so this verifies that the 1.91:1 is still ideal. Thanks!

          • https://corp.wishpond.com/ Nick @ Wishpond

            Yes, no problem!

  • http://iag.me/ Ian Anderson Gray

    Great, thanks for this. Just discovered your blog and I am hooked!
    I assume the best way is to serve the correct dimensioned image on an article via open graph tags? I mean, it is difficult if your featured image is a different ratio to the FB recommendations.

    • http://jonloomer.com/blog Jon Loomer

      Thanks, Ian! Right, it is best if the featured image in your article — presumably the one that is assigned og tags — has the proper dimensions. That’s what I did with this post, and it worked out great!

      • http://iag.me/ Ian Anderson Gray

        I’ve been thinking about this a bit more. I suppose it depends on how your blog or website is configured. Having the featured image of your article optimized for the link image for FB is quite restricting. My blog has quite a wide content area and I wouldn’t want to be restricted this way. Ideally a plugin such as Yoast’s SEO plugin would resize the image for the open graph tags.

        Another way would be to add these image sizes directly to WordPress and then add them to the code. That is the developer in me speaking though. It would be good if there was a plugin that delivered the correct dimensions and aspect ratios to the different social networks (Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Google+)

        Thanks again for a fab post, I have been devouring your posts on Power Editor and dark posts. I think I am getting there. I might sign up for your course some day. Looks like you are the man! :-)

  • Leila Martin

    Great post! Thanks for keeping us up to date. Going thru your course – slowly as you give so much info I “digest” it in bite size pieces ;-)

  • tgonetinnitus

    John this is really cool stuff and is very good news for Facebook marketers! Thanks for the info, it really helped me!

  • tgonetinnitus

    Jon, how would I post a headline above the image and some copy below the image? I just don’t get it! Btw, I just posted an image that is 1200 x 627 and it looks absolutely stunning on the timeline.

    • http://jonloomer.com/blog Jon Loomer

      The link title, domain and description are automatically pulled in from the metadata on your site. If you create a dark post, you can actually edit these items within Power Editor.

      • tgonetinnitus

        Methinks I need to learn more about this stuff. I mean posting to Facebook from my blog. I do it manually but the other way round.

  • http://www.growcial.com/ Growcial

    Do we know how it’s affecting KPIs such as engagement? We see better better fan reaction with posts accompanied by images with links than letting Hootsuite scrape the content and paste in on several of our clients’ pages.

  • Bryan Z

    I just noticed this last night working on a campaign and decided to optimize our images before continuing. Thanks posting valuable content.

  • http://www.freshrag.com/ Dave Conrey

    Nice, Jon. I was wondering what was up last night with a post I shared. This all makes sense now. I appreciate your action on getting this out to the Loomer Nation.

    • http://jonloomer.com/blog Jon Loomer

      HAH! Thanks, Dave.

    • http://jonloomer.com/blog Jon Loomer

      HAH! Thanks, Dave.

  • robertfarnham

    Why is the Business Page still prehistoric in design? It’s nothing like what my Fans Personal Pages look like. So, when I format images to fit they look terrible on my own Wall. Any news on when our Business Pages will be updated?

    P.S. – You continue to rock and I am very grateful for what you do.

  • Vincent Vizachero

    These new improved link share image previews are driving huge increases in link clicks and, as a result, website traffic. This is the biggest change I’ve seen on Facebook. Ever.

  • Scott Linklater

    So if you run an ad to “everywhere” on Facebook, what image size would you use to make all platforms show it in its entirety and look good for maximum conversions?

  • Adrian Curran

    Interesting stuff as always. I seen a recent Google Hangout that Mari Smith done where she was deleting the link image because she was finding that there was a much higher natural reach without it – I have been experimenting with both and have found that to be the case. However there still has been a greater actual click through with the image there than not!

  • roberto

    It doesn’t work for me… i’m trying to share content of my webpage at my facebook page but it continues to appear like little links as it as before.

  • http://www.solo-e.com/blog Terri Z

    Hi Jon,

    I reviewed a few of the images I have posted recently, and the results I got. I’m baffled by a few and hoping you can shed some light.

    A. 398×296, 263 characters of text. Truncated slightly top and bottom, full-width. (This makes sense to me, because the width was about 400 but it > 1.91:1 aspect ratio.) Teeny on mobile (again, makes sense, it’s not at least 560 wide.)

    B. 400×400, very little text, no link. Shows full-size on page/in newsfeed; full-width on ‘droid vertical, about the same size as vertical when viewed horizontal – i.e. not full-width. (Surprised, as the specs above would indicate it should have been cropped or sized down?)

    C, 480×600, very little text, no link. Shows full-size on page/in newsfeed. (Surprised because it doesn’t meet the aspect ratio?) Truncated at the bottom on mobile (about square overall), but full-width both horizontal and vertical. (The truncation makes sense because of the aspect ratio.)


    (I tried a test D with the exact dimensions 560×292 and it is squished vertically and truncated in half horizontally…I’m hoping that is a FB bug and will try later!)

    • http://www.solo-e.com/blog Terri Z

      Hmmm, thought I deleted this post (since I figured it out – link thumbnails, not images with links – duh) but it looks like it just assigned it to “guest”.

  • David Callejas

    Hey Jon, we are trying to take advantage of the larger preview images on Facebook, but can’t seem to get the preview to display any larger than before. Any tips? http://facebook.com/earthsky http://earthsky.org

  • kidmillionaire

    Hi Jon, first of…thank you for such a helpful post! Now, my question is…I think that on our site, thumbnaisl are already set to be 90 x 90. What should we do? Remove that setting? Also, is there a way or plugin that will automatically resize the picture such as choosing the first picture from the post and THAT will be the one that comes out larger on FB? Sorry for the amount of questions but you seem to be VERY helpful! Thank you once again.

2.6K Shares Facebook 1.7K Twitter 329 Buffer 134 Google+ 147 LinkedIn 86 Pin It Share 186 2.6K Shares ×