JPG vs WebP for photographs
Both formats are lossy and both target photos. The difference is the compression engine: JPEG (1992) uses 8×8 block DCT with no prediction, while WebP (2010) borrows intra-frame prediction from the VP8 video codec, entropy-codes more efficiently and applies an in-loop deblocking filter. The practical outcome is that a WebP at quality 80 looks like a JPEG at quality 85–90 but weighs a quarter to a third less.
What quality should I pick for JPG to WebP?
For blog images, product photos and portfolio shots, 75–82% is the sweet spot. For full-screen hero images that are partially covered by text, 60–70% is usually acceptable and saves another 30%. Only go above 90% for print previews or photography portfolios where pixel-peeping is expected.
Avoid double compression
Every lossy step discards information. If you still have the RAW or the original camera JPEG, convert that, not a copy that was already re-saved by a CMS or messaging app. Converting a heavily compressed JPEG to WebP still saves space but cannot restore lost detail.
JPEG vs WebP comparison
| JPEG | WebP | |
|---|---|---|
| Released | 1992 | 2010 |
| Compression | Lossy | Lossy and lossless |
| Transparency | No | Yes |
| Animation | No | Yes |
| Typical size (2000 px photo, q80) | 620 KB | 410 KB |
| Browser support | 100% | 97%+ |