10KB is genuinely tiny. To give you a sense of scale, a single second of a phone call audio file is roughly 8KB. A plain text email with no formatting is usually under 5KB. Getting a recognisable photograph into that space requires aggressive compression, and in most cases it also means reducing the pixel dimensions. The result won't look sharp at full screen, but that's not what these portals are asking for. They're asking for enough visual information to confirm identity or validate a signature, and 10KB is usually enough for that.
The most important thing you can do before compressing is check what the portal actually needs the image for. If it's a signature upload field, a scanned signature on a white background compresses extremely well because most of the image is plain white. A 400 by 150 pixel signature at 10KB will look perfectly clean. If it's a passport-style photo, expect some visible compression and a smaller output resolution, but the image will still be clear enough to submit.
Why signatures compress so much better than photos
JPEG compression works by identifying regions of similar color and encoding them together. A region of pure white takes almost no space because there's nothing to describe. A complex photograph with thousands of different colors and gradients takes much more. A black signature on a white background is almost entirely one color (white) with a small amount of detail (the black ink). That structure compresses to a tiny file size while keeping the actual signature legible. That's why signature upload fields so often have 10KB or even lower limits: they were designed assuming that's what would be submitted.
What happens when quality alone isn't enough
The tool always tries quality reduction first, searching for the highest setting that fits under 10KB. For a photograph rather than a simple scan, even the lowest quality setting can still overshoot, or produce a result too degraded to be worth keeping. When that happens, the tool steps the pixel dimensions down, roughly 75%, then 50%, 35%, 25% and 15% of the original size, re-running the quality search at each smaller size until it finds one that both fits 10KB and clears a minimum acceptable quality. All of this runs in a background Web Worker, so even working through several attempts doesn't freeze the page. This is exactly the kind of tight target this fallback exists for, at a looser target like 1MB it almost never triggers.
If 10KB is not working for your photo, try this
If the compressed result looks too degraded for your use case, and the portal doesn't explicitly say 10KB is the maximum, check the portal's help documentation. Many portals list a range, like "between 10KB and 50KB," which means you have room to use a higher target. Even going to 20KB or 50KB makes a significant difference in the output quality. Since the tool now recompresses automatically when you change the target, comparing 10KB against 20KB takes a single edit rather than starting over. The jump from 10KB to 20KB is roughly double the data, which at these small sizes translates to noticeably sharper results.