consumerista

Thank you for that info. Yeah, I’m not setting the default image length. Those paramaters (290 by 559) are no where in the theme’s CSS files or WP “Media” section.

I tried a preview with another theme and the image resolution is equally low.

What’s interesting, however, is that the top image in each post (not officially “featured”, per se, even though I tend to use the top image as featured so it serves both roles.)

I have another site with the same theme where top image in each post IS affected but on CV it doesn’t seem to be affected by the resizing/low resolution issue, only the images in the body.

I’m going to disable the Images part of Site Accelerator for now since the images are too low resolution for me.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by consumerista.

That is a good catch, and yes I want the image to be 100% mobile.
The Desktop looks good to me.

Where are relevant “media settings” that sets it to 255 by 491? I assume that’s L x W, which would explain the distortion.

I have default thumbnail set to 150 100, medium 300 300, etc. in WP admin

Not sure where I would want to go to edit it. The distortion happens with horizontal-oriented images, as well, where you’d think little stretching is needed but I guess if it’s programmed to do that it would make sense.

Edit: I looked at the theme’s CSS media queries and media code.not really seeing anything there that specifies a resize. however, it’s a Jetpack only issue as when I disable it the image resolution is fine even at 100% on mobile. is there a way to edit settings in Jetpack? Or am I looking for something more theme-general?

The original images are at least 520 wide, but sometimes in the body of post I make them less wide (primarily for desktop, ironically, where they are often aligned right). The theme then “stretches” the image to 100% width for mobile — doesn’t affect resolution at all.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by consumerista.
• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by consumerista.
• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by consumerista.
• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by consumerista.

Yes, it did not resolve the issue of low image resolution. This seems like a unique Jetpack problem because other image plugins do not seem to have this effect.

I disabled Cloudflare because I got it to work but it did not improve load times. It slowed them down in the US and internationally they stayed about the same. Right now, I do better with VPS / advanced caching, and I will have to explore other options at a later date.

You can mark this as resolved. Thanks.

URL: https://tinyurl.com/yt5j7hjx

I have no rules on my account. I have not changed my DNS to Cloudflare. Do I need to do that for this Plugin to work?

WP Fastest Cache has a simple instructional here for integration without a separate plugin: https://www.wpfastestcache.com/tutorial/wp-fastest-cache-cloudflare/

I did this, but didn’t seem to change anything. I wonder if it’s because I haven’t changed the DNS?

I see this in plugin description:
“The free Cloudflare plan allows you to enable a page cache by entering the Cache Everything page rule, greatly improving response times. However for dynamic websites such as WordPress, it is not possible to use this page rule without running into problems as it is not possible to exclude critical web pages from the cache, the sessions for logged in users, ajax requests and much more. Thanks to this plugin all of this becomes possible.”

So, as I understand, I would need this plugin to cache pages properly in addition to the static stuff, in which case the native Fastest Cache integration would not be sufficient. Do you recommend I do the native integration, as well, with the token I generate?

• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by consumerista.
• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by consumerista.

I disabled Minify HTML. No effect.

Thanks for your reply. As I alluded to in my initial post, I tried that code but it did not have a noticeable effect.

Thanks for looking into it.

So here’s a before and after of the second photo in that same article. As you see, the otherwise high resolution images are blurry with Jetpack enabled.

Jetpack enabled
https://ibb.co/RS7nkSF

Jetpack disabled
https://ibb.co/HpmfY5V

Here’s another example from this article

Jetpack enabled
https://ibb.co/TLynR9L

Jetpack disabled
https://ibb.co/WKjRXD4

This is a typical difference in quality across my other blog, as well. A few of the images may be poor quality in which you may not be able to notice a difference, but the better quality the image is, the more marked the reduction is.

The original images are larger than their display both in desktop and mobile, but the image quality does not get reduced with the Jetpack feature disabled as you can see in screenshots^.

https://tinyurl.com/rwn8hvka

it’s activated now. header image seems unaffected on this blog, but images in body are reduced quality. my other blog it affects header images, as well.

I disabled that snippet yesterday since it didn’t seem to affect anything

https://creatorvilla.com

When I compress the images with tinypng, there is no visible reduction in quality, and the thumbnail version is clear. I tried not optimizing and just enabling Jetpack feature and the images were blurry.

FYI, the uploads I did ^ your browser has to be horizontal or the images look messed up. But the difference is quite clear even with the “100” set, and I checked across multiple domains with/without plugins installed.

Thank you for checking

• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by consumerista.

Thank you for the amazing plugin

I did already. 5 stars.

Thanks

Works perfectly.

Thank you

Not letting edit, but here is default code of .entry-title. I reduced the font-weight to 300.

`.archive .entry-title,
.blog .entry-title,
.search .entry-title {

font-size: 21px;
font-size: 2.1rem;
font-weight: normal;
line-height: 1.2;
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
}`

• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by consumerista.

This is the code that I have in CSS which makes the title less thick. The Open Sans appears thinner (good), but the secondary text is flashing thicker, perhaps in the original font-weight.

.page-title, .entry-title {
color: #6C6969;
font-weight: 300 !important;
}