The intent of #1089 was to prioritize a 2:3 image aspect ratio. The issue with this change is that in some cases, very low resolution photos are chosen over more suitable ones. Aspect ratio cannot be the sole method of identifying a quality image.
For example, a 200x300 image (a perfect 2:3 ratio) gets prioritized over a 1200x2000 image. This is too extreme. There needs to be a reasonable cut off where the aspect ratio calculation is secondary to the resolution of a portrait image if there is a major difference between them.
The intent of #1089 was to prioritize a 2:3 image aspect ratio. The issue with this change is that in some cases, very low resolution photos are chosen over more suitable ones. Aspect ratio cannot be the sole method of identifying a quality image.
For example, a 200x300 image (a perfect 2:3 ratio) gets prioritized over a 1200x2000 image. This is too extreme. There needs to be a reasonable cut off where the aspect ratio calculation is secondary to the resolution of a portrait image if there is a major difference between them.