Photo reviews in a PHP script

Photo reviews in a PHP script add evidence to a rating: a product photo, an account screenshot, or a visit photo. Visual proof raises trust more than a long "everything was good" text. At the same time, risks grow: heavy files, unacceptable content, personal data in the frame, and scans of other people's documents. That is why limits and image moderation are mandatory, not a task for "later somehow".

The basic platform flow is a review service. Text and queue: moderation. Search impact: company rating. Website cards: website reviews.

Upload settings

• Formats: JPEG, PNG, WebP; GIF if desired.
• File size and total size per review.
• Maximum number of images, often 3-6.
• Minimum resolution so users do not upload 50x50 files.
• Auto-resize of the long side and thumbnail generation.
• Block EXE/PDF files disguised as images: check MIME and content, not just extension.

Thumbnails in the review feed should be light; full size opens in a lightbox on the card. Without resizing, the catalog and company card will suffer in TTFB.

Image moderation

Moderate images separately from text: a photo can be fine while the caption is toxic, and vice versa. Checklist: pornography, violence, passport or card without masking, photos of children in disputed contexts, obvious advertising of someone else's URL on a banner, and a competitor watermark used as sabotage. When unsure, send it to manual review, not an unexplained "AI auto-removed" decision.

If text premoderation is enabled, it is logical not to show photos until approval. With postmoderation, hide an image by complaint faster than the entire review when the text is neutral and the image is unacceptable.

Author UX

Upload progress, preview before submission, and the ability to remove an image before publication. On mobile, allow camera capture. Add a hint: "blur card numbers and phone numbers". Without it, you get batches of personal data and headaches over deletion requests.

Client-side compression before upload is a nice bonus for mobile authors, but server-side resizing is still required.

Reader UX

In review lists, show a thumbnail grid. In the card, show a gallery. Alt text for accessibility can come from the author's caption or a neutral generated phrase such as "photo for review". Do not autoplay heavy videos if you are not ready for video reviews yet: start with photos.

A "with photos only" filter in a company card and in the general feed increases the value of visual proof and encourages authors to attach images.

Storage and security

Store files outside the public root and serve them through a script, or keep them public with unpredictable names and type checks. Back up uploads together with the database. Antivirus scanning on upload is useful on a VDS when possible. Do not trust a .jpg extension if the binary is not an image.

GDPR-like requests such as "delete my photos" must be feasible: link the file to review ID and author. Hard deletion versus wiping should be defined in the policy.

Impact on TrustScore

A photo does not have to change the score formula. It is a trust signal for readers, not a mandatory weight in the average. If you introduce a sorting bonus for photo reviews, announce it in the rules. A rating widget usually does not need photos: the widget remains compact.

Acceptance checklist

1. Uploading a valid JPEG shows a thumbnail in the review after approval.
2. A file above the limit returns a clear error.
3. Extension spoofing is rejected.
4. A moderator hides only the image; the text can remain according to policy.
5. The "with photos" filter works on the company card.
6. After review deletion, files are not available by direct URL, or return 404.

Typical mistakes

Allowing 20 MB per image. Not making thumbnails. Moderating text and ignoring images. Compressing so hard that the evidence becomes useless. Storing originals with EXIF geolocation without cleanup: think whether you need that ethically and legally; often EXIF should be stripped.

Do not turn a review into Instagram: the priority is the rating text and experience facts. Photos are reinforcement, not replacement.

Video later, photos now

Video reviews are requested often, but they are more expensive in storage, moderation, and playback. Complete the photo flow first: limits, thumbnails, complaints for a single image, and deletion by request. Only then consider short videos with a separate moderation queue. A single "any file" field is the worst solution.

Batch gallery moderation: the moderator scrolls thumbnails and presses "ok / hide" from the keyboard. Without a fast UI, the photo queue stalls before the text queue. Mark already reviewed images so the next shift does not recheck the same ones.

A platform watermark on photos is usually unnecessary and weakens the evidence. Reliable storage and upload logs are more important if a brand disputes authenticity, although such disputes are solved procedurally more than technically.

Company card performance

A card with a hundred reviews and five photos in each will kill the page if everything loads at once. Review pagination, lazy-loaded images, and a separate gallery request are the minimum. A CDN for uploads pays for itself quickly.

Watch inode count and full disks: moderators may reject text while orphaned files remain. A cleanup cron for unlinked files older than N days helps. Test the cron on staging so it does not delete live images because of a JOIN mistake.

In reports, monitor the share of reviews with photos and widget-click conversion for companies with many photos. This tells you whether it is worth encouraging authors with gentle form hints.

Form hints and image quality

Under the upload form, briefly explain which photos are useful: product in hand, order status screenshot, receipt photo with hidden data. Also explain what is not useful: selfies without context, borrowed memes, and chat screenshots with insults. This reduces moderation load without banning everything.

If an image is too blurry to read, you can ask the author to replace it before publication. Automatic sharpness scoring is a future option; at launch, a moderator's eye on the preview is enough.

Do not forget mobile Safari and older Android devices: convert HEIC to JPEG on the server, otherwise some authors get an unexplained upload error and leave without a review.