JPG to WebP
Re-encoded by this tab, never uploaded.
82% is where most photographs stop looking any better. Text and flat colour want more.
The short answer
A JPEG is already compressed, so this is not a first squeeze: WebP simply does the same job with a better algorithm, and usually lands somewhere between a fifth and a third smaller at the same visible quality. What it will not do is repair what the JPEG already lost.
A JPEG is already compressed, so this is not a first squeeze. WebP just does the same job with a better algorithm, and usually lands a fifth to a third smaller at the same visible quality.
The formula
decode the JPEG → draw it onto a canvas → encode as WebP at the quality you pick
Worked examples
- A photograph from a phone
- noticeably smaller, no visible change
- A JPEG already saved at 60%
- smaller, and the old artefacts stay
- A screenshot saved as JPEG
- smaller; raise the quality if text softens
Reference table
| Format | Compression era | Typical size | Transparency |
|---|---|---|---|
| JPEG | 1992 | Baseline | No |
| WebP | 2010 | Smaller than JPEG | Yes |
| AVIF | 2019 | Smaller than WebP | Yes |
| JPEG XL | 2021 | Smaller than WebP | Yes, but browsers vary |
How to use it
- 01Drop the JPEG inOr pick a file. Your browser decodes it locally, so large photographs start instantly.
- 02Set the quality82% suits photographs. Push it higher if the picture contains text or a logo.
- 03Save the WebPBoth sizes are shown, so you can see what the setting actually bought you.
Also searched for
Searches that land here include jpg to webp, jpeg to webp, convert jpg to webp, webp converter and compress jpeg as webp.
Two generations of the same idea
What WebP does differently
JPEG divides a picture into blocks and describes each one on its own. WebP looks at what came before and stores only what changed, which is a much cheaper way to describe a photograph, where most of the picture is a gradual continuation of the rest. The saving is largest on smooth material like skin, sky and shadow, and smallest on noise and hard edges.
The second encode is not free
Every lossy save throws something away. Converting a JPEG to WebP means the picture has now been through two lossy encoders, and the artefacts of the first are baked in as detail the second faithfully preserves. That is why the quality slider matters more here than on a conversion from PNG: you are compressing something that has already been compressed.
Where the file is going decides the format
If it is going on a web page, WebP, and let the browser do the rest. If someone is going to open it in software you do not control, JPEG remains the safest thing to send.
Questions people ask
Why bother, if the JPEG is already compressed?
Because the compression is nearly thirty years newer. WebP predicts each block of pixels from its neighbours and stores only the difference, which JPEG cannot do. On the same photograph at the same visible quality, the WebP is usually the smaller file by a comfortable margin.
Does re-encoding make the picture worse?
Slightly, and unavoidably. Any lossy encoder discards a little more each time, so the WebP inherits every artefact the JPEG already had and adds a touch of its own. At 82% that is not visible on a photograph. Below about 70% you may see the two generations of loss stacking up.
When should I keep the JPEG?
When the file has to be handed to someone else's software. Browsers all read WebP; older desktop editors, some print bureaux and plenty of upload forms still do not. For anything going on a web page, WebP is the better answer.