What each platform publishes about the picture on a shared link.

quoted

Platforms that publish a size

Three documents, and one row about where those numbers already live in this product. Nothing here is rounded or converted.

• Facebook and Instagram (Meta)

  Minimum 200 × 200. Maximum file size 8 MB. “Use images that are at least 1200 x 630 pixels for the best display on high resolution devices”, with 600 × 315 the smallest that renders as a large card. On shape: “as close to 1.91:1 as possible to display the full image in Feed without any cropping.”

  Source Meta for Developers — Sharing: images · 2026-09-25

• LinkedIn

  Minimum 1200 × 627, recommended ratio 1.91:1, maximum file size 5 MB. Images “less than 401 pixels wide display as a thumbnail” beside the text rather than above it. LinkedIn says an image “might be cropped” and does not publish from where.

  Source LinkedIn Help — Images and videos in shares · 2026-09-25

• Open Graph protocol

  Defines og:image:width and og:image:height as the tags a page uses to declare its image size, and publishes no number for either. The dimensions every platform above wants are the platform’s, not the protocol’s.

  Source The Open Graph protocol · 2026-09-25

• What this product already checks against

  Six of the figures above are constants in the Open Graph checker rather than prose on this page: the 200 × 200 minimum, the 600 × 315 large-card floor, the recommended 1200 × 630, the 1.91:1 ratio, and both published file-size maxima — 5 MB and 8 MB. LinkedIn’s 401-pixel thumbnail threshold is quoted in the finding rather than compared against, because Meta’s floor is the wider of the two and fires first. A report that says your card is under-size or over-weight is comparing against the quotations in the rows above, and a test holds the two together so neither can drift.

  Source Already shipped in this product — packages/og-checker/src/types.ts — og-image-size · 2026-09-27

read, and silent

Platforms that publish nothing about size

Both of these were read in full. One says nothing about dimensions at all; the other publishes numbers that belong to a different product and are printed here so they are not mistaken for card guidance.

• Slack

  The link-unfurling reference was read in full. It contains no pixel dimension, no aspect ratio and no file-size limit — the words “1200”, “pixel” and “aspect ratio” do not appear on it. Slack documents how an unfurl is built, not how big its picture should be.

  Source Slack — Link unfurling reference · 2026-09-25

• Pinterest

  Pinterest does publish numeric margins, and they belong to paid ad creative rather than to a shared link: Idea ads at 9:16 reserve top 270, left 65, right 195 and bottom 440 pixels; Showcase ads give 342 × 430; Quiz ads 342 × 376. None of those is a link-share card, and the figures are printed here so nobody borrows them for one.

  Source Pinterest Help — Pinterest product specs · 2026-09-25

not reached

Documents that could not be read

Two, and they are kept apart from the section above on purpose: a document nobody could open says nothing about what the platform publishes.

• X (formerly Twitter)

  The published card-markup address answered 307 and redirected to a general overview page, which rendered 2,381 characters of client-side content containing no occurrence of “summary_large_image”, “1200” or “twitter:image”. The card specification was not reachable from that address on the day this was read. That is not the same as X publishing nothing.

  Source X — Cards markup reference (redirected to a general overview) · 2026-09-25

• Discord

  DNS timed out after 15 seconds. Nothing was read, so nothing is reported — the row is here because an absent row and an unreachable document look identical from outside, and only one of them is a fact about Discord.

  Source Discord Support — embed article (DNS timed out) · 2026-09-25

What none of them publishes

No platform in this table publishes a margin, inset or protected region for the image on a shared link. Seven documents were fetched looking for one.

The only platform that publishes numeric margins is Pinterest, and it publishes them twice over for paid ad creative — once as four edge insets and once as a rectangle with no stated origin. Neither describes a shared link.

And the document that determines more cards than any other says the opposite of what such a region would imply: Meta asks for a ratio as close to 1.91:1 as possible so the image displays in full, without any cropping. At the right shape, the protected region is the whole picture.

So the honest answer to “where will my logo get cut off” is that nobody publishes one — and a page that invented a figure would be guessing on your behalf about a crop no platform has documented.

Not looked at

This table is a source sweep and not a survey. The platforms below were not fetched at all, and two were reached without being read: WhatsApp’s and Telegram’s help pages both answered 200 and their contents were not opened. Naming them is the point — a missing row and a checked-and-empty row are different things, and only one of them has been earned here.

• Instagram’s own documentation
• TikTok
• WhatsApp (answered 200, not read)
• Telegram (answered 200, not read)
• Reddit
• Bluesky
• Mastodon
• Google Discover
• Apple Messages and iMessage previews
• Microsoft Teams