Evaluate the image as it is actually cropped and placed on the page. Check the retained source detail, final physical size, and exported result against current print requirements, then inspect whether the illustration still communicates the information the reader needs.
Keep the original and the placed version distinguishable
A high-quality source image can become unsuitable when only a small portion is enlarged to fill a page. Preserve the original file and identify the crop used in the manuscript. Record the image's role, the chosen frame, and the intended printed dimensions so the review concerns the actual publication use.
Do not judge every placement from the original thumbnail or filename. The same asset may appear as a small supporting figure in one chapter and a large detail view in another. Each placement uses the available information differently, and an approval for the smaller version does not automatically cover the larger one.
Check what information the crop removes
Before assessing technical resolution, inspect the crop's meaning. A close view may make one feature easier to see while removing the surrounding context needed to interpret it. In a craft guide, cropping tightly around a stitch could hide the edge that shows its orientation. The image may look sharper yet become less useful.
Compare the crop with its caption and nearby instructions. Confirm that every referenced label, comparison object, or directional cue remains visible. If the image no longer supports the explanation, change the crop or revise the text deliberately. Technical image checks cannot detect every mismatch between what the illustration shows and what the chapter asks the reader to understand.
Evaluate the retained detail at the final size
Inspect the amount of image information retained in the selected area and the physical size at which it will appear. A crop enlarged substantially deserves a fresh review. Check the production tool's relevant image and placement information rather than relying on a resolution label detached from the final layout.
KDP's current paperback submission guidance specifies minimum image resolution and provides additional preparation guidance. Apply the requirements to the actual output being submitted, and verify how your tool reports the placed image. Do not assume that changing a displayed resolution value by itself restores detail that was absent from the source or removed by cropping.
Distinguish a larger file from a more informative image
An export or enlargement process can produce a file with more pixels or a larger storage size without recovering the original subject's missing detail. Review the visible result for the task the image must perform. A decorative background and a diagram with small labels demand different kinds of clarity even when their files look similar in a folder.
If an AI enhancement changes the asset, inspect factual and visual details again. Added texture, altered lettering, or reconstructed shapes may be inappropriate when the image is meant to show a real object or an exact procedure. Keep the revised asset's origin clear and do not treat a more polished appearance as proof of documentary accuracy.
Inspect the image after export
Review the exported manuscript rather than only the source layout. Confirm that the intended crop and size survived, that the correct file was used, and that any compression or conversion did not make important features difficult to distinguish. Inspect nearby text and captions at the same time so the figure remains a complete part of the explanation.
Use an appropriate physical proof to evaluate the printed experience where needed. Check whether fine lines, labels, and meaningful tonal differences are usable at the actual size. A zoomed screen view can reveal artifacts, but it does not reproduce every property of the printed page or the way a reader will hold and inspect the book.
Choose the correction that serves the reader
If the placed image fails review, consider a wider crop, a smaller placement, a better source, or a newly prepared illustration. The right correction depends on why the image is needed. Replacing a detailed photograph with a simplified diagram may be appropriate for an explanation, while a guide documenting an actual object may require a more faithful source image.
Record the approved crop and placement with the final asset so later layout changes trigger the relevant check again. Complete the remaining file and content review before export approval. Meeting a resolution requirement addresses one technical condition; the author still needs to establish that the image is accurate, readable, and connected to the manuscript's purpose.
Frequently asked questions
Clear answers for this publishing decision.
Can the same image be acceptable in one placement and unsuitable in another?
Yes. Cropping and enlargement change how much source information supports the printed area. Review each materially different placement rather than transferring approval from a small figure to a full-page version.
Does increasing a resolution label create missing detail?
Do not rely on the label alone. Inspect the actual source information, processing, and final output. A larger file or changed setting does not by itself establish that important details are present and accurate.
What should I do when a close crop removes context?
Compare it with the reader’s task. Widen the crop, provide another view, or revise the explanation as appropriate, then recheck both the technical placement and the meaning of the figure.
What must I check, disclose, and verify myself when AI helped produce the book?
Review facts, rights, and source material yourself, record which parts were AI-assisted or AI-generated so you can answer Amazon’s disclosure question accurately, and treat every automated check as a starting point rather than a verdict.
See what the compliance checks cover