Should you put a photo on your resume? It depends entirely on where you are applying

In the US, UK, Canada and Australia a photo actively hurts you, for reasons that have nothing to do with how you look. In much of Europe and Asia it is expected. Here is the map and the reasoning.

Updated 2026-08-05 · 5 min read

This question gets answered with unusual confidence by people who have only ever applied in one country, which is why the advice contradicts itself so often. The honest answer is that the convention is regional, the reasons behind it are institutional rather than aesthetic, and following the wrong convention has real costs in both directions.

Where a photo hurts you

In the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand, do not include one.

The reason is not that recruiters dislike photos. It is that a photograph introduces information about your race, approximate age and gender into a document that the employer would prefer not to have, because that information creates discrimination exposure. Larger employers in these countries have compliance processes built around this. Some recruitment teams are instructed to reject resumes containing photographs outright, and others will ask you to resubmit without one, because a file with a photo in it complicates their defence if a rejected candidate later alleges bias.

Which means the mechanism is administrative rather than personal. Your photo is not being judged; its presence is a procedural problem, and the cheapest resolution for the person holding your resume is to set it aside.

There is a second cost. A photo occupies roughly a fifth of the top of page one, and in these markets it is almost always placed in a sidebar — which is the layout most likely to have a parser interleave your job titles with your skills list. So the photo often brings a structural parsing problem with it.

Exceptions, narrow and genuine: acting, modelling, presenting and some client-facing hospitality roles, where appearance is a bona fide occupational requirement. In those fields a headshot is part of the standard submission, usually as a separate file rather than embedded in the resume.

Where a photo is expected

In Germany, Austria, Switzerland, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Italy and much of Central and Eastern Europe, a photo is conventional and its absence is noticed.

The German-speaking countries are the strongest case. The traditional Bewerbungsfoto is a specific artefact: professionally taken, neutral background, business dress, placed top right. Nothing about it is casual, and using a cropped holiday photograph is worse than using none. Anti-discrimination law in Germany has technically made photographs optional since 2006, and large international employers there increasingly run photo-free processes, but the convention persists strongly at mid-size and traditional companies.

In much of Asia — China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia — a photo is standard, and in Japan and Korea the format is highly prescribed, sometimes down to the dimensions and the required document template. Applying without one in these markets reads as an incomplete application rather than as a stylistic choice.

What to do when you cannot tell

Three reliable tells, in order of usefulness:

Look at the employer's own careers page. If they publish a template, an application form with a photo upload field, or example applications, that is your answer and it overrides any country-level generalisation.

Follow the headquarters, not your location. A US-headquartered multinational hiring in Munich usually runs a US-style process, including the photo-free convention. A German firm hiring in Boston may still expect one. When the two conflict, the recruiting team's location is the better guide, and the job posting's language often gives it away.

Default to no photo when genuinely uncertain. In a photo-expected market, omitting one is a mild deviation from convention. In a photo-prohibited market, including one can be a procedural rejection. The asymmetry points one way.

The LinkedIn point

There is a common argument that photos cannot matter, because a recruiter will look at your LinkedIn profile anyway and see your face there.

That is true and it misses the mechanism. The problem in the US and UK is not that the employer learns what you look like — it is that a photograph inside the submitted application document becomes part of the record of that application. A recruiter choosing to view a public profile is a different act with a different legal position. This distinction sounds like a technicality and it is exactly the technicality the policies are built on.

What to do with the space

If you are removing a photo, you now have a useful amount of room in the most-read part of the page. The best uses, in order:

A summary that says something specific. Three lines naming your category, your scale and the one thing you are unusually good at. More on making that worth the space.

Contact details that are complete and correct. Email, phone, city, and one link that goes somewhere you would defend. For designers and developers, the portfolio link is the most valuable line on the page.

Nothing. White space at the top of a resume reads as confidence, and it makes your name and the first section easier to find. It is a legitimate choice and better than filling the gap with a graphic.

While we are here: the other decorations

The photo question usually travels with a few others, and they have the same answer for the same reason.

Skill rating bars and star ratings carry no text, so a parser extracts the skill name with no level attached, and they invite a reader to look for your weakest bar. Say the level in words with a duration instead.

Icons instead of labels — a little envelope instead of "Email", a pin instead of your city — extract as nothing, which occasionally means your email address arrives in the database with no field label attached to it. Use the words.

Graphs, timelines and infographic layouts are the strongest version of the same problem: information encoded in a way that only a human eye can read, in a document whose first reader is not a human eye.

None of this is an argument for an ugly resume. Typography, spacing and hierarchy all survive parsing perfectly well and do more for readability than any graphic element. It is an argument against putting meaning anywhere the text layer cannot carry it.

Try it on your own resume

Open the free builder Run the ATS checker

Keep reading