1.91
Decimal ratio
the social-link preview ratio used across OG images and many feed cards
1.91 : 1
1.91:1 Aspect Ratio Calculator
The complete 1.91:1 reference for Open Graph images, Facebook and LinkedIn feed posts, and blog featured images. Calculate exact dimensions, understand the difference between exact 1.91 and rounded platform exports, and copy CSS-ready values without manual math.
Open Graph imagesFacebook and LinkedIn postsBlog featured images
52.36%
CSS padding value
the legacy responsive fallback for exact 1.91:1 media shells
2
Platform rounding patterns
1200×630 and 1200×628 are both common near-1.91 production exports
Calculate 1.91:1 Dimensions
Move between exact 1.91 dimensions, rounded platform sizes, and CSS-safe output
Use exact 1.91:1 math for OG cards, social feed images, featured blog art, and responsive media containers. Switch modes to calculate, verify, or normalize dimensions before export.
Enter a known width and the calculator derives the exact matching height.
×
Pixel mode uses the native output dimensions directly.
Quick 1.91:1 resolutions
Current Output
1910 × 1000 px
The output stays locked to exact 1.91:1 math, including a CSS padding fallback of 52.356%.
Ratio
1.91:1
Decimal
1.91
CSS Padding
52.356%
Diagonal
2156 px
Switch to verify mode to check whether any existing file, crop, or export is exact 1.91:1 or only approximate.
Resolution Reference
Common 1.91:1 sizes for social previews and web sharing
These sizes cover both mathematically exact 1.91:1 outputs and the rounded dimensions that major platforms commonly recommend in production workflows.
SOCIAL
Social and preview delivery
Near-1.91 exports used by feed cards, previews, and social-sharing artwork.
WEB
Web and editorial delivery
Useful sizes for featured images, case-study openers, and responsive preview cards.
MASTER
High-resolution masters
Sharper working files for retina previews, campaign systems, and reusable source art.
Why 1.91:1 Matters
Why 1.91:1 became the language of social sharing cards
1.91:1 matters because it became the practical shape for link-preview graphics. Open Graph images, Facebook feed cards, LinkedIn shares, and many blog featured-image systems all converge around this wide but still usable landscape frame.
The ratio is wide enough to feel modern and headline-friendly, but not so wide that the image collapses into a narrow banner. That is why it works well for article artwork, product teaser images, and campaign cards that need both typography and imagery in the same frame.
The workflow detail people miss is that platforms often publish rounded recommendations such as 1200×630 or 1200×628. Those are close to 1.91:1, but not mathematically identical. A useful reference page has to explain both the exact ratio and the real platform sizes people actually export.
Common Sizes
The exact and rounded 1.91:1 sizes people actually ship
The exact 1.91:1 ratio reduces to 191:100, which means sizes such as 1910×1000 or 3820×2000 are mathematically clean. In real publishing work, however, 1200×630 and 1200×628 are more common because they map neatly to social and CMS defaults.
That is why verification matters. If you are checking CSS math, use the exact value. If you are exporting for Open Graph or a platform upload flow, the rounded size is usually the safer production choice.
For teams standardizing card art, the best workflow is often to design on a high-resolution exact canvas, then export rounded platform versions as the final delivery files.
Use Cases
The workflows where 1.91:1 is the cleanest sharing-card ratio
1.91:1 is strongest wherever an image has to work as a headline-bearing landscape card rather than a cinematic banner or a mobile-first portrait frame.
🔗
Open Graph and link previews
1.91:1 is the default mental model for link-sharing graphics because it matches how article previews appear across Facebook, LinkedIn, and many messaging surfaces.
1200×6301910×1000
📰
Blog featured images
Editorial systems often use near-1.91 images because they read cleanly in cards, search-like listings, and share previews without wasting too much height.
1600×8382400×1257
💼
LinkedIn and Facebook feed posts
Landscape posts on professional and news-style feeds often rely on this ratio because it feels structured, readable, and compatible with headline-driven creative.
1200×6301200×628
🧩
Responsive media cards
Design systems frequently use 1.91:1 for case-study cards, article summaries, and related-content modules because it leaves room for both images and overlay text.
1910×10002400×1257
📣
Campaign teasers and announcement art
When the creative has to travel between website modules and social sharing cards, 1.91:1 is a safer compromise than 16:9 or more aggressive banner ratios.
1200×6303820×2000
🧭
Search-style result modules
Any layout that feels like a feed, result set, or recommendation shelf can benefit from the compact width and headline-friendly framing of 1.91:1.
1600×8381910×1000
CSS and Layout
Use exact 1.91:1 in CSS even when the upload file is rounded
For layout systems, the exact CSS expression is `aspect-ratio: 191 / 100`. That lets the browser reserve the intended landscape shape precisely without relying on platform-rounded upload sizes.
If you need a legacy fallback, the equivalent padding-top is 52.356%. In practice, rounding that to 52.36% is precise enough for responsive layout work.
This ratio is particularly good for preview cards, linked article modules, and social-sharing embeds because it stays wide without becoming fragile at small viewport widths.
Height from Width
H = W × (100 ÷ 191)
Example: 1910 × (100/191) = 1000
Width from Height
W = H × (191 ÷ 100)
Example: 630 × 1.91 = 1203.3
CSS Padding
P = (100 ÷ 191) × 100 = 52.36%
Use `padding-top: 52.36%` for the legacy fallback
Copy-ready CSS
Modern `aspect-ratio` plus a padding fallback
.ratio-frame {
aspect-ratio: 191 / 100;
}
.ratio-frame--legacy::before {
content: "";
display: block;
padding-top: 52.356%;
}
/* Example output size: 1910x1000 */Decision Guide
Choose 1.91:1 when the image has to behave like a share card
1.91:1 is the right call when the graphic is fundamentally a landscape card with a headline, a clear focal image, and a need to travel across websites and social previews.
Pick 1.91:1 if the destination is a link preview, a blog feature image, a feed card, or any recommendation-style module where 16:9 feels slightly too wide and square feels too heavy.
Avoid it when the placement expects a native vertical format, a cinematic video frame, or a true banner with strong edge-to-edge horizontal storytelling.
Use 1.91:1 for
- ✓Open Graph and social preview art
- ✓Facebook and LinkedIn landscape posts
- ✓Blog and editorial feature cards
- ✓Responsive article and case-study modules
Avoid 1.91:1 for
- ×Full-screen vertical video
- ×Cinematic long-form video frames
- ×Ultra-wide banner headers
- ×Tightly cropped square-first grids
Compare Nearby Ratios
See how 1.91:1 sits between widescreen and panoramic cards
1.91:1 is only slightly wider than 16:9, but in practice it behaves more like a sharing-card ratio than a video ratio.
16:9
1920×1080
1.7778
Best for: Video, slides, YouTube thumbnails
Avoid for: Link-preview systems that expect card art
1.91:1
1200×630
1.9100
Best for: OG images, feed cards, preview modules
Avoid for: Strict cinematic video framing
2:1
1600×800
2.0000
Best for: Panoramic heroes, wide editorial scenes
Avoid for: Compact sharing cards
How To
How to calculate or verify a 1.91:1 aspect ratio
- 1
Choose whether the size should be exact or platform-rounded
Use exact 191:100 math for CSS or design systems, then decide whether the delivery file should round to a platform-friendly size such as 1200×630.
- 2
Enter a known width or height
Type one side into the calculator and let it derive the matching exact dimension.
- 3
Verify the practical export size
Check whether your chosen rounded export is close enough to behave correctly on the target platform.
- 4
Copy the CSS or export dimensions
Use the exact ratio value for layout code and the rounded size for the final upload file when the platform expects a specific integer resolution.
Frequently Asked Questions
Frequently asked questions about 1.91:1
Is 1200×630 exactly 1.91:1?
No. It is very close, but not exact. 1200 divided by 630 is about 1.9048.
Why do people still call 1200×630 a 1.91:1 image?
Because it is the common rounded platform export for Open Graph and social-sharing workflows, and it behaves close enough to the exact ratio in practice.
What CSS value matches exact 1.91:1?
Use `aspect-ratio: 191 / 100;` or the legacy fallback `padding-top: 52.36%`.
What platforms use 1.91:1 most often?
Facebook, LinkedIn, Open Graph image systems, blog featured-image modules, and many card-based editorial layouts.
Keep Exploring
Explore nearby ratios and workflows
→
16:9 Guide
Compare standard widescreen with the more card-like 1.91:1 frame.
→
2:1 Guide
Go wider when the card needs to feel more panoramic than preview-oriented.
→
CSS Generator
Generate exact CSS values for uncommon ratios and rounded production sizes.
→
Aspect Ratio Cheat Sheet
Jump back to the full ratio-first and platform-first reference page.