Hero images create more launch drama than most design teams expect.
They sit at the top of the page, consume a large share of the visual budget, and often become the largest image the browser has to load before the page feels complete. If the hero is too heavy, the page feels slow. If the compression is too aggressive, the screenshot, illustration, or product shot that should build trust starts looking soft.
That is why hero-image work needs its own process instead of living inside a generic “export the assets” step.
TinyImage is a strong fit for this job because it keeps compression, format conversion, GIF and MP4 export, and PDF export close to the Figma source. For landing page teams, the real benefit is not only smaller files. It is giving design and marketing a repeatable way to ship the first visual on the page without asking developers to reprocess every asset afterward.
This article is intentionally narrower than nearby TinyImage content like Website Asset Compression Budget for Design Teams, How to optimize Figma exports for page speed, and Product Screenshot Export Workflow for SaaS Landing Pages. Those cover broader budgets, page-speed thinking, or screenshot-heavy sections. This one is specifically about the hero image, where performance, cropping, and storytelling all collide on the first screen.
Hero images are not just bigger versions of other assets
A feature screenshot halfway down the page can be imperfect and still survive.
A hero image usually cannot.
It has to do several jobs at once:
- attract attention immediately
- support the main message instead of competing with it
- stay readable behind or beside headline copy
- crop well across desktop and mobile
- load fast enough that the page does not feel stalled
That combination is what makes hero-image workflow different from general web-image workflow.
There are usually three hero-image types:
- product-led hero visuals with interface screenshots
- brand-led photography or illustration
- hybrid hero compositions mixing UI, device frames, diagrams, or supporting graphics
Each type creates different export risks. Product-led heroes need text and UI details to stay sharp. Brand-led images can often compress more aggressively. Hybrid compositions usually fail on cropping before they fail on quality.
Decide what the hero has to prove before exporting anything
The most useful question is not “PNG or WebP?”
It is “what is this hero proving to the visitor?”
Common answers:
- this product is real and polished
- this workflow is easier than the old one
- this campaign or service feels premium
- this page has a concrete visual point of view
Once that job is clear, you can export around it.
If the hero exists to prove product credibility, the crop needs to protect the interface detail that makes the product believable.
If the hero exists to create atmosphere, the composition can prioritize mood and motion more than tiny UI fidelity.
If the hero mixes marketing copy with a screenshot, the focal area needs to survive even when the layout compresses on tablet or mobile.
Hero optimization gets easier the moment the team stops treating every landing page hero like the same kind of image.
Build the crop system before the compression pass
Many “image-quality” problems are actually crop problems.
A hero can look beautiful in Figma and still ship badly because the live layout:
- hides the part of the image that explains the product
- pushes important details behind the headline block
- crops away the visual anchor on mobile
- leaves too much decorative empty space relative to file weight
Before export, define:
- the desktop focal area
- the mobile-safe focal area
- whether the hero needs separate desktop and mobile variants
- whether the page overlay text will sit on top of the image or next to it
This is where teams save the most time. When the crop rules are clear early, compression becomes much more predictable. When the crop rules stay vague, designers keep exporting “better” files that still feel wrong in production.
If your hero includes product UI and supporting screenshots, Responsive Image Handoff from Figma is a good companion process.
Choose the format by hero behavior, not habit
Many teams still default to PNG because it feels safe.
For hero images, that often means carrying far more weight than the page needs.
A better approach:
- use PNG when the hero includes important UI text, crisp line detail, or transparency that should stay very clean
- use WebP when you want a lighter hero asset without falling back to JPG by default
- use AVIF when your site stack already supports it cleanly and the image benefits from smaller modern delivery
- use MP4 or GIF only when the hero genuinely needs motion to explain the product, not because animation feels more premium by itself
The main point is that the format should match the visual job of the hero.
If the hero is a UI-heavy product shot, visual clarity often matters more than squeezing out every last byte.
If the hero is a soft photo or illustration, lighter modern formats usually earn their keep faster.
If your team is still standardizing modern image choices in general, WebP vs AVIF for Figma Exported Images is the closest related read.
Review the hero at rendered size, not only on a designer monitor
This is where many hero exports get approved too early.
On a large screen at high zoom, both versions may look fine. On the actual landing page slot, one version will usually reveal the truth.
Review each candidate hero by asking:
- does the image still feel sharp at the real rendered size?
- is the page headline easier or harder to scan beside it?
- does the crop still communicate on mobile?
- is the file weight justified by what the image contributes?
Hero visuals are one of the few places where a slightly heavier file can still be the right decision. But that should be a deliberate tradeoff, not an accidental default.
The team should be able to say, “Yes, this hero deserves more weight because it is the main proof asset on the page,” or “No, this decorative background can compress harder without hurting the story.”
Run a landing-page-specific export pass in TinyImage
The export routine should be simple enough that the team can repeat it across launches.
One practical sequence:
- Isolate the approved hero variants in Figma.
- Name them by page and breakpoint, not by internal design shorthand.
- Export a quality-first version and a lighter alternative.
- Compare them in the real layout or a realistic preview slot.
- Keep the version that preserves the intended story without wasting weight.
Useful names:
homepage-hero-dashboard.webpproduct-hero-mobile.pngcampaign-hero-illustration.aviffeature-launch-hero.mp4
TinyImage is especially useful here because the designer does not need to bounce between Figma, a separate compression tool, and a naming cleanup pass. The hero can move from approved design to optimized export with fewer handoff gaps.
A hero-image checklist before launch
Before the landing page ships, confirm:
- the hero has one clear job on the page
- desktop and mobile crops were reviewed separately when needed
- the chosen format matches the image content
- UI-heavy hero details stayed readable after compression
- decorative space is not inflating file weight without helping the story
- filenames are clear enough for implementation handoff
- the live page was checked once the hero was implemented
Where TinyImage helps most
TinyImage does not decide whether the page should lead with a screenshot, a product montage, or an illustration. That is still a marketing and design call.
What it does remove is the messy middle:
- exporting an oversized file
- compressing it somewhere else
- discovering the crop is wrong
- exporting it again under deadline
Landing page heroes deserve more care than a generic asset-export step. When the team gives hero images their own workflow, the page feels faster, cleaner, and more deliberate from the first screen. TinyImage makes that workflow much easier to keep inside Figma instead of turning it into a manual cleanup routine after design approval.
Pro Bundle