Image Converter

Swap between JPG, PNG, WEBP, GIF, TIFF, ICO, CUR, and BMP with full metadata control and instant previews.

Back to Tools

Transcoding batch...

Drop images here or click to browse

Supports HEIC, AVIF, common RAW, ICO/CUR, ZIP bundles.

Process up to 50 files per batch ZIP archives unpack locally

Conversion queue

  • Queue files to preview status, estimated weight, and output names.

Conversion preferences

Advanced options

Prefer WEBP or PNG when you need alpha transparency. JPEG export auto-flattens to solid backgrounds.

Drop files to see live previews.

Batch progress

Files disappear from our servers right after we hand you the converted download links.

Converted files will land here with preview thumbnails, metadata, and download buttons.

<p>The <strong>WebP converter</strong> turns any supported image into a WebP file. WebP is Google's image format aimed at modern web delivery: typically 25 to 35 percent smaller than the equivalent JPG at the same visual quality, with full alpha-channel transparency and animation support. The converter accepts JPG, JPEG, PNG, AVIF, HEIC, HEIF, BMP, TIFF, GIF (including animated), ICO, and RAW files from Canon, Nikon, Sony, and other camera manufacturers, and produces a WebP output ready for any context where a modern browser will render it.</p> <h2>What Makes WebP Different</h2> <p>WebP combines two encoders into one container format. The lossy mode uses the VP8 video codec to compress photographic content significantly tighter than JPG; the same image at perceptually identical quality typically ends up 25 to 35 percent smaller. The lossless mode uses a different encoder entirely, with prediction and entropy coding tuned for graphics, and produces files typically 25 to 30 percent smaller than the equivalent PNG. The converter exposes both modes plus a quality factor for the lossy path.</p> <p>The result is a single format that can replace JPG, PNG, and animated GIF in one shot. Modern browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge) all render WebP natively. Every social platform, every modern CMS, every static site generator accepts it. The remaining holdouts are mainly older email clients, legacy enterprise tools, and certain print pipelines, which is why JPG and PNG still have a place as fallbacks.</p> <h2>When WebP Is the Right Output Format</h2> <ul> <li><strong>Hero images and product photography on the web:</strong> the LCP (Largest Contentful Paint) metric on most content sites is dominated by hero image weight. Converting the JPG hero to WebP typically shaves 30 percent off and shaves visible time off page load.</li> <li><strong>E-commerce catalog pages:</strong> a category page with 24 product thumbnails at JPG quality 95 is several megabytes. The same page in WebP is roughly two-thirds the weight.</li> <li><strong>Article inline images on blogs and news sites:</strong> same logic. Image bytes are the dominant page weight; WebP cuts them without quality loss.</li> <li><strong>UI graphics, illustrations, icons:</strong> use lossless WebP. Smaller than the equivalent PNG, same pixel-exact output, full alpha support.</li> <li><strong>Animated GIFs you want to keep:</strong> animated WebP is typically 60 to 80 percent smaller than the original GIF at the same visual quality, with full 24-bit color instead of GIF's 256-color limit.</li> <li><strong>Anywhere you control the destination and the consumers are on modern browsers:</strong> WebP is the default.</li> </ul> <h2>When WebP Is Not the Right Choice</h2> <p>WebP loses to AVIF on photographic compression. AVIF typically compresses another 20 percent tighter than WebP at the same visual quality, at the cost of slower encode time and slightly newer browser support. For sites where image bytes are critical and the audience is on current browsers, AVIF is worth the extra encoding cost. For most sites WebP is the practical sweet spot.</p> <p>WebP also loses to JPG on universal compatibility. Older email clients, legacy CMS, certain print pipelines, and many desktop tools still cannot read WebP cleanly. If the file might travel through any of those, <a href="/en/image-converter/png-to-jpg">JPG</a> or PNG is the safer choice. The standard production pattern is to serve WebP via the picture element with JPG or PNG as the fallback for browsers that cannot decode WebP.</p> <h2>What the Converter Does with Your File</h2> <p>Each file streams to the conversion endpoint, gets decoded into a memory buffer, runs through the WebP encoder, and is returned as base64 inside the JSON response. The browser reconstructs each file and offers it as a direct download, or repackages the whole batch into a single ZIP for download. Up to 50 files per batch, 40 MB per file. ZIP archives are unpacked server-side and each entry counts against the same 50-file limit.</p> <p>Options worth knowing:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Lossy or lossless:</strong> lossy is the default for photographic content; the quality factor controls the compression-versus-fidelity tradeoff. Lossless mode preserves every pixel exactly and is the right choice for graphics, screenshots, and UI assets.</li> <li><strong>Animation:</strong> animated GIF inputs are unpacked frame-by-frame with original timing and loop count, re-encoded into the WebP container, and reassembled. The output is an animated WebP that plays at the same speed and loops the same way as the source.</li> <li><strong>Alpha channel:</strong> PNG and HEIC inputs with transparency keep their alpha intact in the WebP output. WebP supports alpha in both lossy and lossless modes, so you do not have to trade transparency for file size.</li> <li><strong>Color profile and metadata:</strong> ICC color profiles and EXIF tags are preserved by default. The strip-metadata option removes them before export, recommended before publishing personal photos.</li> </ul> <h2>WebP and the Rest of the Pipeline</h2> <p>For sites that have JPG-only image libraries, the typical migration is: convert the existing JPGs to WebP for primary delivery and keep the JPGs as the fallback. The <a href="/en/image-converter">main image converter</a> handles batch JPG-to-WebP runs. To shrink WebP files further after conversion, use the <a href="/en/image-compressor">image compressor</a> with a lower quality factor; WebP quality 75 to 80 is the sweet spot for web photographs and produces files about half the size of quality 90 with no visible difference at normal viewing distance. For multi-page documents, the <a href="/en/image-to-pdf">image-to-PDF converter</a> packs a batch of WebP files into a single PDF.</p> <h2>Privacy</h2> <p>Each conversion runs in memory on the server. Files are never written to disk, never indexed, never logged, never cached. The buffer is cleared as soon as the response is sent. No registration, no rate limits, no tracking of which images you have converted.</p> <h2 class="tools-section-title">FAQ</h2> <div class="collapse-group collapse-group-narrow"> <div class="collapse-container collapse-faq" data-collapse-accordion data-collapse-group="seo-faq" data-collapse-no-save data-collapse-key="seo_faq_1"> <button class="collapse-header" type="button"> <div class="collapse-header-content"> <i class="fas fa-lightbulb collapse-header-icon" aria-hidden="true"></i> <span class="collapse-header-title">How much smaller is WebP than JPG?</span> </div> <i class="fas fa-chevron-down collapse-chevron" aria-hidden="true"></i> </button> <div class="collapse-content"> <div class="collapse-content-inner"> <p>For photographic content at perceptually identical quality, WebP is typically 25 to 35 percent smaller than JPG. The savings come from the underlying VP8 codec, which is more efficient than JPG's discrete cosine transform. The exact ratio depends on the image content: photos with smooth gradients and large flat areas compress especially well, while photos with fine high-frequency detail save less. WebP and JPG quality numbers are not directly comparable: WebP at quality 80 looks roughly equivalent to JPG at quality 90, not JPG at quality 80.</p> </div> </div> </div> <div class="collapse-container collapse-faq" data-collapse-accordion data-collapse-group="seo-faq" data-collapse-no-save data-collapse-key="seo_faq_2"> <button class="collapse-header" type="button"> <div class="collapse-header-content"> <i class="fas fa-lightbulb collapse-header-icon" aria-hidden="true"></i> <span class="collapse-header-title">Should I use WebP or AVIF?</span> </div> <i class="fas fa-chevron-down collapse-chevron" aria-hidden="true"></i> </button> <div class="collapse-content"> <div class="collapse-content-inner"> <p>WebP is the practical default for most sites. It has near-universal modern-browser support, encodes quickly, and shrinks files significantly compared to JPG and PNG. AVIF compresses tighter still, typically another 20 percent on top of WebP at the same visual quality, but takes substantially longer to encode and has slightly newer browser support. For image-heavy or LCP-critical pages, AVIF is worth the extra encoding cost. For everything else, WebP gives most of the benefit with less complexity. Modern picture-element setups often serve AVIF first, WebP as fallback, JPG as the universal safety net.</p> </div> </div> </div> <div class="collapse-container collapse-faq" data-collapse-accordion data-collapse-group="seo-faq" data-collapse-no-save data-collapse-key="seo_faq_3"> <button class="collapse-header" type="button"> <div class="collapse-header-content"> <i class="fas fa-lightbulb collapse-header-icon" aria-hidden="true"></i> <span class="collapse-header-title">Does WebP support transparency the way PNG does?</span> </div> <i class="fas fa-chevron-down collapse-chevron" aria-hidden="true"></i> </button> <div class="collapse-content"> <div class="collapse-content-inner"> <p>Yes. WebP supports a full 8-bit alpha channel in both lossy and lossless modes, so soft drop shadows, anti-aliased edges, and partial-transparency masks all survive conversion exactly. Lossless WebP with alpha is typically 25 to 30 percent smaller than the equivalent PNG with no quality difference. Lossy WebP with alpha shrinks photographic content with transparent regions far below either PNG or lossless WebP.</p> </div> </div> </div> <div class="collapse-container collapse-faq" data-collapse-accordion data-collapse-group="seo-faq" data-collapse-no-save data-collapse-key="seo_faq_4"> <button class="collapse-header" type="button"> <div class="collapse-header-content"> <i class="fas fa-lightbulb collapse-header-icon" aria-hidden="true"></i> <span class="collapse-header-title">Can I convert animated GIFs to animated WebP?</span> </div> <i class="fas fa-chevron-down collapse-chevron" aria-hidden="true"></i> </button> <div class="collapse-content"> <div class="collapse-content-inner"> <p>Yes. Animated GIFs are decoded frame-by-frame with their original timing and loop count. Each frame is re-encoded into the WebP container and the animation is reassembled with timing intact. The result is typically 60 to 80 percent smaller than the source GIF at the same visual quality, with the bonus that WebP supports full 24-bit color per frame instead of GIF's 256-color palette limit. Modern browsers and chat apps render animated WebP natively.</p> </div> </div> </div> <div class="collapse-container collapse-faq" data-collapse-accordion data-collapse-group="seo-faq" data-collapse-no-save data-collapse-key="seo_faq_5"> <button class="collapse-header" type="button"> <div class="collapse-header-content"> <i class="fas fa-lightbulb collapse-header-icon" aria-hidden="true"></i> <span class="collapse-header-title">Will my WebP image work in email and older browsers?</span> </div> <i class="fas fa-chevron-down collapse-chevron" aria-hidden="true"></i> </button> <div class="collapse-content"> <div class="collapse-content-inner"> <p>Modern browsers all render WebP. Older email clients (Outlook 2016 and earlier, some webmail variants), legacy enterprise tools, and certain desktop image viewers may not. If the image needs to travel through any of those, JPG or PNG is the safer choice. The standard pattern for the open web is to serve WebP via the picture element with a JPG or PNG fallback, so modern browsers get the smaller file and older tools still see something. For direct sharing via email or chat, JPG remains the most universally compatible target.</p> </div> </div> </div> <div class="collapse-container collapse-faq" data-collapse-accordion data-collapse-group="seo-faq" data-collapse-no-save data-collapse-key="seo_faq_6"> <button class="collapse-header" type="button"> <div class="collapse-header-content"> <i class="fas fa-lightbulb collapse-header-icon" aria-hidden="true"></i> <span class="collapse-header-title">Lossy or lossless WebP for my use case?</span> </div> <i class="fas fa-chevron-down collapse-chevron" aria-hidden="true"></i> </button> <div class="collapse-content"> <div class="collapse-content-inner"> <p>Use lossy WebP for photographic content (camera photos, product shots, scenic images) where some imperceptible quality loss is acceptable in exchange for much smaller files. Use lossless WebP for graphics, icons, screenshots, logos, charts, illustrations, and any image with sharp edges, solid color regions, or text. The rule of thumb: if the source was a JPG, use lossy WebP; if the source was a PNG, use lossless WebP unless file size is critical.</p> </div> </div> </div> <div class="collapse-container collapse-faq" data-collapse-accordion data-collapse-group="seo-faq" data-collapse-no-save data-collapse-key="seo_faq_7"> <button class="collapse-header" type="button"> <div class="collapse-header-content"> <i class="fas fa-lightbulb collapse-header-icon" aria-hidden="true"></i> <span class="collapse-header-title">Are uploaded files stored anywhere?</span> </div> <i class="fas fa-chevron-down collapse-chevron" aria-hidden="true"></i> </button> <div class="collapse-content"> <div class="collapse-content-inner"> <p>No. Files stream to the conversion endpoint, decode into a memory buffer, run through the WebP encoder, and return in the response. Nothing is written to disk, indexed, logged, or cached. The buffer is cleared as soon as the response is sent, so there is no copy left to recover. The tool requires no registration and does not track which images you have converted.</p> </div> </div> </div> </div>