I have looked on Android Firefox, Mac OSX Firefox, Android Chrome, Mac OSX Chrome, and flipped from portrait to landscape, I checked multiple instances, and thereby multiple themes (my account normally uses darkly-compact). In several of these scenarios the image is resized to be “tiny” as in <1/20th of the screen width, and from there it ranges up to 1/3rd, or at the absolute widest ~3/4ths of the screen (someone else also replied to the person you replied to showing this screenshot demonstrating that width for them too).
Throughout all of this, the person you replied to has only managed to conjure up 3 facts, one being an extremely generic term “web browser”, 1 seemingly objectively false (“giant”), and the other 1 at best seems unreproducible by anyone here (“full screen width”).
In short, the person you replied to seems to be acting in a trolling manner, as in like a canonical Karen, which frankly does seem surprising given how clearly articulated the original message of theirs was. We would be happy to help them diagnose further but at this point they just seem to be venting - granted though, not so much in the message you replied to on its own.
On a web browser it sizes the image to be full size at full screen width, making it giant compared to text
I’m on Firefox. Images are always reasonable size.
Must be a desktop vs mobile browser thing. Looks fine with a mobile browser on lemmy.world to me.
It looks like the image is 960 x 1080 so in browser it should blow up that large. Not sure why you have been downvoted
I have looked on Android Firefox, Mac OSX Firefox, Android Chrome, Mac OSX Chrome, and flipped from portrait to landscape, I checked multiple instances, and thereby multiple themes (my account normally uses darkly-compact). In several of these scenarios the image is resized to be “tiny” as in <1/20th of the screen width, and from there it ranges up to 1/3rd, or at the absolute widest ~3/4ths of the screen (someone else also replied to the person you replied to showing this screenshot demonstrating that width for them too).
Throughout all of this, the person you replied to has only managed to conjure up 3 facts, one being an extremely generic term “web browser”, 1 seemingly objectively false (“giant”), and the other 1 at best seems unreproducible by anyone here (“full screen width”).
In short, the person you replied to seems to be acting in a trolling manner, as in like a canonical Karen, which frankly does seem surprising given how clearly articulated the original message of theirs was. We would be happy to help them diagnose further but at this point they just seem to be venting - granted though, not so much in the message you replied to on its own.