Hi, my advice would be to remove any visible white bars (not allowed per our Image rules). Then, if the image quality is good and the size is close to the minimum, I would change the size to reach minimum size. While upscaling images resulting in bad quality is not allowed, a small upscale with a good quality final image is fine. Make sure to not distort the image though. That usually means changing (or not changing depending on your image program) a setting about keeping the aspect ratio when re-sizing an image.

Additional question- why is it, and I've just checked all of the entries, why is it that all the good quality posters I've uploaded, with perfect 2:3 aspect ratios, look lower quality/more blurry on the website than they actually are?

There will always be some compression made by TMDb. In some cases you have to scale down images to get the best possible quality. For example, I deleted this backdrop that you added since the image wasn't good enough for that size. You would have to experiment how much smaller you need to go before the quality is good enough.

Is there any other image you want me to take a look at? Except for that backdrop the few images I sampled were all good quality so I don't think I need to go over all of your images.

Just noting that white bars (or any bars) if part of original poster, not edited in, but like, a border, are fine to stay. At least that what I was told when I inquired about them once upon a time.

But don't add bars because the image is too enough, or screengrabs from Netflix or a mediaplayer with black bars on the sides or top and bottom.

Does scaling down images always make for a better quality image on TMDB (always increase image quality)? And hence, is it a good idea to, even though it may be extra effort, to always scale down (maybe to the smallest resolution possible- like to 500 x 750 for posters)? Or is it really a tricky, case-by-case thing, where for some images downscaling can reduce image quality, or maybe downscaling starts to decrease image quality if images are downscaled too far? (I'm asking because testing this all out on the database- and having to then get those images removed, seems like a lot of unnecessary trouble).

There are a lot of factors deciding image quality. For example, many image programs let you set a percentage when re-saving an image. If you set that number too low, the end quality will be bad no matter what you do. But if the original image quality is excellent, then downscaling may not be necessary at all. In such a case, there is always a risk that someone else uploads the same image in better quality (and bigger size) and your image will be removed. So it's always a balance. If you are still unsure about this, feel free to post a sample image and someone will give you feedback.

Is there any problem with me only using Paint to do things like cropping and this one upscale (EDIT: and downscaling)? I can use other image programs if there is a problem with using Paint.

I haven't used Paint for this purpose, but maybe someone else is familiar with it? From using Paint for other purposes (like creating print screen images) I don't remember any quality settings, but I assume the default setting is pretty good since I have never noticed any obvious problems.

How do I post a sample image (straight from my computer)? Or do I have to upload it on an image uploading site first?

Or do I have to upload it on an image uploading site first?

That would be the easiest.

(Edit: I'm out for a few hours, but will take a look back later.)

https://imgur.com/WmXGPR9

@tmdb24407783 said:

https://imgur.com/WmXGPR9

I'm already back. Just for an experiment, can you post the original you used to create that image? Then I can try to see what I can get out of it. The image you posted is probably OK, but it would be great to try it out myself.

https://imgur.com/jx39iws. Tell me what you learn if you get something better.

Thanks. My guess after having tried out the original image is that you would have to go down to maybe minimum size, or - at most 1400 x 788, in order to get a decent enough image. I also noticed that the original you posted was re-saved at 73 percent which is not great. So at some point there was a better quality image available. Unfortunately, as with many images, we may never get to see that original image. And sometimes you have to be happy with what you can find. In this case it means creating a smaller backdrop, but that should be good enough until someone can find something better.

Re-saved at 73%? How did you know that? So if I come across a large image (to use for a backdrop) and the quality is somewhat lacking (for its large size), is it a generally good policy in order to upload a really good/best/decent quality image, to scale it down to minimum (or close to) size?

I also have the official poster which I used for the movie's primary (it's the only one) poster. Should I also upload it- and upvote it so that it becomes the backdrop used? It might be a better quality for its size than the other (textless) one. I initially just discarded the idea of using this original poster as the backdrop because it had already been used for the poster. But there's nothing about the poster and the backdrop having to be different from each other right?

Original poster: https://imgur.com/SR1TQcL

Re-saved at 73%? How did you know that?

I have a setting in my image program that uses the setting that was used when the image was previously saved. It's actually quite rare to get unprocessed images anywhere these days, but sometimes you get lucky!

So if I come across a large image (to use for a backdrop) and the quality is somewhat lacking (for its large size), is it a generally good policy in order to upload a really good/best/decent quality image, to scale it down to minimum (or close to) size?

It depends on how bad the quality is. I recently came across some raw images that were 5000 x 3333 in size and I had to make them into 1920 x 1080 to keep sharpest possible quality. So it varies from case to case. The tricky part is to decide when the quality is good enough. I tend to go somewhat on the safer side most of the time.

But there's nothing about the poster and the backdrop having to be different from each other right?

We prefer the clean backdrops, without any credits or text, but I think we allow horizontal posters as well. Maybe @alltimemarr knows for sure? I have seen such backdrops around in any case.

So the textless one should be the primary backdrop? Or is the horizontal poster I just showed much higher in quality and hence should be the primary one?