Skip to main content
Accessibility.com, LLC
Category: Visual and Media Accessibility

Images of Text

Also known as: Text in Images, Bitmap Text, Rasterized Text
Simply put

Images of text are pictures that contain words rendered as a graphic rather than as actual, selectable text on a page. Because the words are part of an image, people who rely on screen readers may not be able to read them unless a proper text alternative is provided, and people who need to enlarge or restyle text may find these images become blurry or cannot be adjusted. For these reasons, using real text is generally preferred over images of text whenever possible.

Formal definition

An image of text is a visual presentation of textual content encoded within a graphic (such as a raster or bitmap format) rather than as machine-readable text marked up in the document. Under the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), the treatment of images of text is addressed by success criteria including 1.4.5 Images of Text (Level AA) and 1.4.9 Images of Text (No Exception) (Level AAA), both introduced in WCAG 2.0, which generally require that text be used to convey information rather than images of text except where a particular presentation is essential or customizable. Practitioners should note that images of text typically do not scale cleanly when magnified, cannot be restyled by the user (for example, adjusting font, color, or spacing), and require an accurate text alternative to be conveyed to assistive technologies. Meeting the relevant success criteria supports conformance but does not by itself guarantee an accessible experience; manual and assistive technology testing remain necessary, and this entry is informational rather than legal advice.

Why it matters

Images of text can create significant barriers for people who rely on assistive technology or who need to customize how content is displayed. When words are baked into a graphic rather than presented as actual text, screen readers cannot interpret the content unless an accurate text alternative is provided. Similarly, users who enlarge content often find that images of text become pixelated or blurry, because raster and bitmap graphics do not scale as cleanly as real text. People who restyle content to meet their needs, such as adjusting font, color, contrast, or spacing to accommodate low vision or dyslexia, generally cannot apply those adjustments to text locked inside an image.

Because of these barriers, the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) address images of text through success criteria including 1.4.5 Images of Text at Level AA, which is the conformance level most commonly cited as a target. Level AA is frequently referenced in accessibility contexts, so organizations aiming for that benchmark generally need to prefer real text over images of text except where a specific presentation is essential or where the image is customizable. Reducing reliance on images of text tends to improve the experience for a broad range of users while also supporting conformance goals.

It is worth emphasizing that meeting the relevant WCAG success criteria supports conformance but does not by itself guarantee an accessible experience or legal compliance. Automated tools may flag some images but cannot reliably determine whether a text alternative accurately conveys the meaning of the words in an image, so manual review and assistive technology testing remain necessary. This entry is informational and is not legal advice; requirements can evolve through regulation and case law, and organizations with specific legal questions should consult qualified counsel.

Who it's relevant to

Accessibility Engineers and Developers
Developers implement content decisions that determine whether words appear as real, selectable text or as graphics. Understanding the distinction helps them use CSS-styled text where possible, reserve images of text for cases where a particular presentation is essential, and provide accurate text alternatives when an image of text is unavoidable. Because automated tools detect only a portion of related issues, engineers should also verify results through manual and assistive technology testing.
UX and Visual Designers
Designers often reach for images of text to achieve specific typography or layout effects. Being aware that such images do not scale cleanly when magnified and cannot be restyled by users helps designers choose approaches that preserve visual intent while keeping content accessible. Where a distinctive presentation is genuinely essential, designers can plan for an accurate text alternative.
Content Authors and Editors
People who add banners, quotes, infographics, or promotional graphics may unintentionally introduce images of text. Recognizing when words are embedded in a graphic allows authors to favor real text or to supply meaningful alternative text so the information is available to people using screen readers.
Compliance Officers and Accessibility Program Leads
Those overseeing accessibility programs use criteria such as WCAG 1.4.5 (Level AA) as part of conformance targets. They should understand that satisfying these criteria supports conformance but does not by itself guarantee an accessible experience or legal immunity, and that manual review is needed to confirm text alternatives are accurate. For legal questions, they should consult qualified counsel.

Inside Images of Text

Images of Text
Graphics that render textual content as pixels rather than as machine-readable, selectable text. Examples include a JPEG or PNG of a headline, a promotional banner containing wording, or a scanned document page.
Real Text Alternative
Actual text encoded in HTML or another markup language, which can be resized, restyled, selected, and read directly by assistive technologies without relying on an alternative description.
Text Alternative (alt text)
A textual equivalent provided for an image so that assistive technology can convey the content to users who cannot see the image. When text is presented as an image, the alt text generally must convey the same wording.
WCAG Success Criterion 1.4.5 Images of Text (Level AA)
A WCAG 2.0 success criterion, carried into later versions, that generally requires text to be used rather than images of text except where the image is essential (such as a logotype) or where a particular presentation of text is customizable to the user's requirements.
WCAG Success Criterion 1.4.9 Images of Text (No Exception) (Level AAA)
A WCAG 2.0 Level AAA success criterion that permits images of text only when they are purely decorative or where a particular presentation is essential to the information conveyed.
Essential Exception
Cases where an image of text is generally permitted, such as logotypes or brand names where the specific visual presentation is integral to the identity being conveyed.

Common questions

Answers to the questions practitioners most commonly ask about Images of Text.

Does using an image of text count as providing the text if I add alt text to the image?
Alt text makes the content of an image of text available to screen reader users, which is important, but it does not fully address the underlying issue. Images of text cannot be resized, restyled, or recolored the way real text can, so they may still create barriers for users who rely on custom fonts, spacing, or contrast settings, or who magnify content. WCAG generally treats real text as preferable to images of text for this reason. Alt text is a necessary fallback when an image of text is used, not a substitute for using actual text where feasible.
Are all images of text prohibited under WCAG?
No. WCAG does not ban images of text outright. The relevant success criteria allow exceptions, such as when a particular presentation of text is essential (for example, a logo, a brand mark, or where the specific visual appearance conveys meaning that cannot be reproduced with real text) or when the image of text can be visually customized to the user's requirements. The general expectation is to use real text when the same visual presentation can be achieved with technology, but exceptions exist and are defined within the guidelines. This is a summary of the standard and not legal advice.
How can I tell whether something on my page is real text or an image of text?
One common check is to try selecting or highlighting the content with your cursor; real text can typically be selected, while an image cannot. You can also zoom in substantially: real text generally remains crisp, whereas images of text often become pixelated or blurry. Inspecting the page source or using developer tools to see whether the content is marked up as text or embedded as an image (for example, within an img element or a background image) can also confirm which you are dealing with.
What is a good approach when a designer wants a specific font that isn't a standard web font?
Web fonts allow custom typefaces to be applied to real text through technologies such as CSS, so a distinctive font is often achievable without resorting to an image of text. Using real text with an embedded web font generally preserves the ability to resize, restyle, and adjust contrast, which images of text do not. Where a specific typeface cannot be delivered as a web font, teams can weigh whether that exact presentation is essential before deciding to use an image of text as a fallback.
How should I handle logos that contain text?
Logos are commonly treated as a recognized exception, since the specific visual presentation of a logotype is often considered essential to its identity. In such cases, providing an appropriate text alternative that conveys the logo's text or purpose is generally the expected practice, so that assistive technology users receive the equivalent information. As always, applying the exception should be evaluated against the specific wording of the relevant success criteria.
How do automated accessibility tools handle images of text?
Automated tools can detect the presence of images and flag missing alt text, but they generally cannot reliably determine whether an image actually contains text or whether real text could have been used instead. Identifying images of text and judging whether an exception applies typically requires manual review, including visual inspection and testing with assistive technologies. Automated testing detects only a portion of accessibility issues, so it should be combined with manual evaluation.

Common misconceptions

Adding alt text to an image of text makes it fully equivalent to real text.
Alt text helps convey the wording to some assistive technology users, but images of text generally cannot be resized, recolored, or reflowed like real text, which can create problems for users with low vision or those who rely on custom styling. Real text is preferred under WCAG SC 1.4.5 (Level AA).
All images of text violate WCAG.
WCAG SC 1.4.5 (Level AA) allows exceptions, notably where the image is essential (such as a logotype) or where the text presentation can be visually customized to the user's requirements. The stricter SC 1.4.9 (Level AAA) applies a narrower set of exceptions.
Images of text are fine as long as the image resolution is high.
High resolution does not resolve the core issue. Images of text may still pixelate or blur when magnified and generally cannot adapt to a user's chosen font, spacing, or color settings, unlike real text.

Best practices

Use real, machine-readable text styled with CSS instead of images of text wherever the visual design can be achieved with actual text.
Reserve images of text for cases that fall under recognized exceptions, such as logotypes or brand names where the specific presentation is essential.
When an image of text is unavoidable, provide a text alternative that conveys the same wording so assistive technology users receive equivalent information.
Target WCAG Success Criterion 1.4.5 (Level AA) as a commonly cited baseline, and consider the stricter SC 1.4.9 (Level AAA) for contexts requiring the highest conformance.
Verify that text presented visually can be resized and restyled to meet user requirements, since images of text generally cannot adapt to custom font, spacing, or color settings.
Confirm results through manual and assistive technology testing rather than relying solely on automated checks, which detect only a portion of accessibility issues.