What this does
Re-encodes JPG photos as WebP, in your browser, up to 20 at a time. At the same visual quality WebP files come out roughly 25–35% smaller than their JPG sources — savings you bank on every single page view.
Is it worth converting existing JPGs to WebP?
If the images are served on a website, usually yes. Image bytes dominate most pages' transfer size, and WebP's more modern codec gets the same perceptual quality from fewer bits. The conversion pays off most for hero images and galleries — large photos requested by every visitor. For images that live in a folder and get emailed occasionally, JPG is fine as is.
Won't converting lossy → lossy hurt quality?
There is a second compression generation, so the output can't be better than the input — but at quality 85+ the additional loss is imperceptible in practice. Two guidelines: don't convert at a higher quality than you need (you'd just embalm JPG artifacts in a bigger file), and if you still have the original RAW/PNG source, encode WebP from that instead via the PNG to WebP converter.
What quality setting balances size and looks?
- 80–85 — recommended for web photos; typically 30%+ smaller than the source JPG.
- 92 (default) — near-transparent quality for when the image matters more than the bytes.
- 60–75 — thumbnails and previews where small artifacts don't matter.
Do I need fallback images for old browsers?
For sites today, generally no — WebP decoding has shipped in all major
browsers since 2020. If your audience includes very old WebViews or
embedded browsers, the <picture> element lets you offer
the original JPG as a fallback while everyone else gets the smaller file.
Is my data private?
Yes. Like every tool on this site, the work happens in your tab — photos are never uploaded, logged, or stored anywhere.