# Is there any reason why small images don't have thumbnails?

**URL:** <https://meta.discourse.org/t/is-there-any-reason-why-small-images-dont-have-thumbnails/61806>\
**Category:** UX\
**Created:** [28. April 2017 um 23:22 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/is-there-any-reason-why-small-images-dont-have-thumbnails/61806 "2017-04-28T23:22:58Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![codinghorror](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/codinghorror/32/110067_2.png) [@codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/u/codinghorror)\
**Post date:** [28. April 2017 um 23:28 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/is-there-any-reason-why-small-images-dont-have-thumbnails/61806/2 "2017-04-28T23:28:28Z")

</div>

Er… what? If the image is actual size, it is displayed as actual size. So you think this image..

 ![](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/meta/original/3X/9/7/972d90bc8c88ca5dc196ea31df53ebb357009350.gif)

… should have a “CLICK ME TO EXPAND TO FULL SCREEN!” option?

I don’t agree.

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/is-there-any-reason-why-small-images-dont-have-thumbnails/61806)._