This resource provides writers with tools and insights to construct the essential architecture of a Substack publication, from visual assets to post formatting.
Thanks for all your insights. Quick question: what about the wordsmark logo. Recommended size is at least 1344x256 or above with 21:4 aspect ratio. Me - and many others here - seems to have an issue with that: on desktop version it's displayed as really tiny
I am trying to make my own wordmark image and am struggling with sizing. right now no matter what I do the text and image look too small. What would you suggest?
Thanks, folks! I've just hit 100 subscribers and am really excited to make the presentation better on the physical landing page. This gives me a lot to think about.
As an independent creator, it's important to have a place where your work can live and thrive. A place where you can build a community of supporters and followers. A place where you can control the narrative.
Enter Substack.
Substack is a platform that allows you to do just that. It's a place where you can create and share your work, without having to worry about the algorithm or someone else's agenda.
With Substack, you can build a home for your work. A place where you can reach your audience directly, without having to go through the filter of social media or the noise of the internet.
It's a place where you can connect with your readers on a deeper level, and create the kind of work that you want to be known for.
So if you're ready to take your work to the next level, and build a home for it, then Substack is the platform for you.
Thanks for this article. It was very helpful and insightful. One question - is it a good practice to link previous substack articles in every new article ? Will it harm the readership ?
Is .png the best format to save images in, or is .jpg better? Also, I've noticed that the thumbnail images, the small images that show up on the "Archive" page, for example https://moviewise.substack.com/archive, seem to be pretty low resolution/fuzzy, even though when the article is viewed the main picture there is high resolution/sharp:
Thanks, but 1456 x 1048 px is too big, and would take up too much space on the page. Is it not possible to just increase the thumbnail resolution (or not compress them so much?) so that the small images on the "Archive" and "Home" pages etc. aren't blurry? The larger ones (the actual image files) on the published pages are not blurry.
Hi Katie, will doing this update/change the thumbnail images displayed on a newsletter's "home" page: https://moviewise.substack.com and the "Archive" page?
Hi again Katie! Thanks for taking the time to answer, but the link you provided only mentions that this is to see "what your post will look like on social media such as Twitter." The images displayed on Twitter are much larger than the thumbnails on the Substack newsletter's "home" or "archive" pages. Also, creating new thumbnails for posts is redundant/unnecessary work (and pretty time consuming) since Substack already provides the thumbnails on newsletter's "home" or "archive" pages, it's just that the resolution is too low. Is there any way to bring this to the attention of Substack engineering? If not, then what exactly are the dimensions for the thumbnails that are displayed on a newsletter's "home" or "archive" pages? I'd hate to go through all that trouble to have the images still be compressed or truncated, and therefore still blurry.
How to add a simple spreadsheet 3 by 3 cells? No any way? Nothing works.
Even GPT5 don't know how to resolve this puzzle.
<i>Markdown is a plain-text way to add simple formatting (tables, headings, bold, links) using readable characters instead of a visual toolbar. Many editors accept Markdown typed directly into a normal text block and automatically render it; if your editor only shows raw code blocks and basic formatting, it may not support Markdown rendering in the place you’re pasting.</i>
You should propose a template where we can chose a visual and you could do it - AI is there for such burdens - we can not say that when we are looking for a specific design, your site is easy to handle ...
You should define these terms. They aren't obvious to everybody:
Logo: At least 256 x 256 px with a transparent background.
Email banners: Recommended 1100 x 220 px with a transparent background, but could be taller.
Cover image: At least 600 x 600 px.
Social / post preview image: We recommend at least 1456 x 1048 px, but 420 x 300 px is the minimum. 14:10 is the aspect ratio for the preview images.
Thanks for all your insights. Quick question: what about the wordsmark logo. Recommended size is at least 1344x256 or above with 21:4 aspect ratio. Me - and many others here - seems to have an issue with that: on desktop version it's displayed as really tiny
It was a great session — and this is a fantastic value-packed post. Thanks for sharing.
And special thanks to Kellyn for her slides; so clean and minimal. Loved it.
Thanks for sharing this! This is very insightful! I'd like to know more about readers' behavior
I am trying to make my own wordmark image and am struggling with sizing. right now no matter what I do the text and image look too small. What would you suggest?
sublime - inspired - divine! :)
This was very helpful, thank you!
Is there any guidance for image sizes on Substack Notes?
thank you for this information :
Preston Park
Better Brains
Apr 9, 2023
You should define these terms. They aren't obvious to everybody:
Logo: At least 256 x 256 px with a transparent background.
Email banners: Recommended 1100 x 220 px with a transparent background, but could be taller.
Cover image: At least 600 x 600 px.
Social / post preview image: We recommend at least 1456 x 1048 px, but 420 x 300 px is the minimum. 14:10 is the aspect ratio for the preview images.
What is recommended size for an image within a post? My home page shows the post's image as being too large to fit. Thanks.
Thanks, folks! I've just hit 100 subscribers and am really excited to make the presentation better on the physical landing page. This gives me a lot to think about.
As an independent creator, it's important to have a place where your work can live and thrive. A place where you can build a community of supporters and followers. A place where you can control the narrative.
Enter Substack.
Substack is a platform that allows you to do just that. It's a place where you can create and share your work, without having to worry about the algorithm or someone else's agenda.
With Substack, you can build a home for your work. A place where you can reach your audience directly, without having to go through the filter of social media or the noise of the internet.
It's a place where you can connect with your readers on a deeper level, and create the kind of work that you want to be known for.
So if you're ready to take your work to the next level, and build a home for it, then Substack is the platform for you.
https://www.huffpost.com/archive/ca/entry/to-pay-or-not-to-pay-someone-to-write-my-essay-for-me_b_14793970
Thanks for this article. It was very helpful and insightful. One question - is it a good practice to link previous substack articles in every new article ? Will it harm the readership ?
Good question...can we put previous links under the heading......You may also like....?
Is .png the best format to save images in, or is .jpg better? Also, I've noticed that the thumbnail images, the small images that show up on the "Archive" page, for example https://moviewise.substack.com/archive, seem to be pretty low resolution/fuzzy, even though when the article is viewed the main picture there is high resolution/sharp:
https://moviewise.substack.com/p/movie-wisdom-on-making-friends
Could someone help explain what may be wrong? Could the resolution in which the thumbnails are created be increased?
Hi Katie,
Thanks, but 1456 x 1048 px is too big, and would take up too much space on the page. Is it not possible to just increase the thumbnail resolution (or not compress them so much?) so that the small images on the "Archive" and "Home" pages etc. aren't blurry? The larger ones (the actual image files) on the published pages are not blurry.
Hi Katie, will doing this update/change the thumbnail images displayed on a newsletter's "home" page: https://moviewise.substack.com and the "Archive" page?
Hi again Katie! Thanks for taking the time to answer, but the link you provided only mentions that this is to see "what your post will look like on social media such as Twitter." The images displayed on Twitter are much larger than the thumbnails on the Substack newsletter's "home" or "archive" pages. Also, creating new thumbnails for posts is redundant/unnecessary work (and pretty time consuming) since Substack already provides the thumbnails on newsletter's "home" or "archive" pages, it's just that the resolution is too low. Is there any way to bring this to the attention of Substack engineering? If not, then what exactly are the dimensions for the thumbnails that are displayed on a newsletter's "home" or "archive" pages? I'd hate to go through all that trouble to have the images still be compressed or truncated, and therefore still blurry.
How to add a simple spreadsheet 3 by 3 cells? No any way? Nothing works.
Even GPT5 don't know how to resolve this puzzle.
<i>Markdown is a plain-text way to add simple formatting (tables, headings, bold, links) using readable characters instead of a visual toolbar. Many editors accept Markdown typed directly into a normal text block and automatically render it; if your editor only shows raw code blocks and basic formatting, it may not support Markdown rendering in the place you’re pasting.</i>
You should propose a template where we can chose a visual and you could do it - AI is there for such burdens - we can not say that when we are looking for a specific design, your site is easy to handle ...