How to use the JPG to WebP Converter
Drop in your JPG files
One or a batch, decoded locally.
Set the quality
Around 80 to 85% is the usual sweet spot for photographs.
Download the WebP
The saving is shown per file.
Worth doing for a website, rarely worth doing otherwise
WebP typically produces photographs 25 to 35% smaller than JPEG at the same perceived quality. Across a page carrying a dozen images that is a real difference to load time, and it is the single easiest image optimisation available.
If the file is not destined for a web page, the calculation changes completely. JPEG is readable by everything ever made; WebP is readable by browsers and an incomplete list of everything else. Converting a photo you are about to email is a small size win in exchange for a real chance the recipient cannot open it.
You are re-encoding something already lossy
A JPEG has already discarded detail. Converting it to WebP encodes the result a second time, which discards a little more - this is generational loss, and it is why converting back and forth repeatedly visibly degrades an image.
In practice one conversion at a sensible quality is not noticeable. But the best WebP always comes from the original, uncompressed source rather than from a JPEG, so if you still have the original, export from that instead.
Frequently asked questions
- How much smaller is WebP than JPG?
- Usually 25 to 35% at the same perceived quality, with the saving larger on images containing flat areas or gradients.
- Will quality drop?
- Slightly, because the JPEG is being decoded and re-encoded. At 80 to 85% quality the difference is not visible at normal viewing size.
- Should I convert photos I plan to email?
- Probably not. WebP support outside browsers is inconsistent, and JPG is the format that will definitely open on the other end.
- Can I convert back to JPG afterwards?
- Yes, but each round trip re-encodes and loses a little more. Keep the original JPG rather than relying on converting back.