Jump to content

Uploading images, https://images.squarespace-cdn.com vs https://static1.squarespace.com/

Recommended Posts

When we upload images via the "Asset Library" or an image block GUI, they're hosted on images.squarespace-cdn.com and they appear in the "Asset Library". When we upload images via the CSS "Custom Files" or as an "Unlinked File", they're hosted on static1.squarespace.com. Pros and cons either way? Besides appearing or not appearing in the "Asset Library", are there benefits for hosting images on one domain vs the other? I suppose the "Custom Files" panel gives a little easier access to the img URL for use in CSS.

Edited by tedfitzpatrick
extra thought
Link to comment

So I did some digging. When uploaded as an "Asset Library" (images.squarespace.com) img, squarespace does some magic to reduce the file size (to 380kb from 1.5MB in my test case). It looks like squarespace returns the smallest version of the image while maintaining quality. Interestingly, my duplicate test image uploaded as a CSS Custom File downloaded faster (39ms vs 70ms) despite being much larger in file size (squarespace didn't perform size reduction). Interesting that a larger file downloaded faster, likely due to the server-side logic running on images.squarespace. Also, static1 downloads faster even when there are no query string parameters in the images.squarespace URL. Seems like CSS Custom Files should be prefered for images unless an end user will be using the GUI to manage images. 

Edited by tedfitzpatrick
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

×
×
  • Create New...

Squarespace Webinars

Free online sessions where you’ll learn the basics and refine your Squarespace skills.

Hire a Designer

Stand out online with the help of an experienced designer or developer.