When is WEBP better than JPG?
WEBP has inherent support for animation while JPG does not have such a feature. This makes WEBP suitable for creating animations or live pictures such as logos, videos, and images that improve user experience.
The demerit of JPG is that it cannot handle different web imageries as it hardly supports animation and transparent backgrounds, making WEBP a versatile file format that balances website efficiency and image quality.
When is JPG better than WEBP?
JPG is mainly preferred to WEBP because of its universal support and stability for complex graphics and photographs. It increases users' online experience where WEBP files would otherwise fail to open or upload.
The disadvantage of WEBP is that it is not widely supported or compatible with older web browsers and Mobile applications limiting its global use and user experience in certain web browsers or apps.
Table Comparison
Element | JPG | WEBP |
Transparency | Does not support transparent backgrounds or alpha channel. | Supports transparent backgrounds or alpha channel. |
File Size | It uses an efficient lossy compression technique to give smaller file sizes. | It uses lossy and lossless compression techniques to result in significantly smaller file or image sizes. |
Image Quality | High-quality images from complex files. Repeated compression results in low image quality. | High-quality image using the lossless method. Produces sharp and stunning images. |
Performance | Enhances web performance or increases website speed. | Smaller images enhance websites’ functionality or boost web responsiveness. |
Structure | Made of a series of segments, each starting with a marker. | Comprises a container based on RIFF and VP8 or VPL8 image data. |
Animation | No inherent support for animation. Cannot be used for live images or pictures. | It supports animation or live pictures, including logos, videos, and images. |
Storage | Minimal storage bandwidth and compressed image data are stored in file systems, hard disks, cloud servers, and CDNs indefinitely. | Stores compressed image data indefinitely in file systems, cloud, CDN, hard disks, and floppy drives. Minimal storage space is needed. |
Compression | Only uses block-based lossy compression. | Uses effective predictive coding in lossy and lossless compression. |
Browser Support | Fully compatible and supported by all web browsers and devices. | Supported by major browsers like Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera, and Edge. IE, Edge 12 -17, and Firefox 2-64 are not supported. |
Differences and similarities between WEBP and JPG images
WEBP and JPG exhibit differences in transparency support, file size, image quality, animation support, metadata, compression methods, application, and browser support. The file formats share similarities in lossy compression, web browser compatibility, and image size.
Transparency
JPG files do not support transparent backgrounds, while WEBP does. The JPG file format finds it difficult to merge flawlessly with websites featuring different background colors. Its transparent pixels are filled with white, a solid color.
WEBP supports an alpha channel that primarily permits information transparency. The alpha channel indicates the file's transparency level. WEBP pixels support transparent images, namely graphics or logos with non-rectangular shapes.
File Size
WEPB and JPG file formats compress images to minimize their sizes for easier sharing and storage. However, WEBP files are smaller than the customary JPG images using the same SSIM index.
Google developers affirm that WEBP lossless compressed images can be 25% to 34% smaller than JPG images.
Image Quality
WEBP images offer better or comparable high-quality images than JPG at smaller file sizes. Nonetheless, cases exist where JPG can give better high-quality images at a particular size than WEBP.
WEBP can lose image qualities with repeated lossy compression on very detailed images. Its lossy compressed images can be blurry or degraded when working with high-resolution, fine details, or complex images, which should be exhibited at high fidelity.
JPG lossy compression preserves key image detail in very complex files while maintaining image quality. WEBP has a more effective compression because of highly advanced compression techniques like predictive coding and color transform, which reduce redundancy in the image data and decorate the RGB values of each pixel.
Performance
WEBP lossless images are 25-34% smaller than JPG images, resulting in increased web performance and reduced bandwidth usage.
WEBP images are lighter and offer the best user experience by increasing website loading time and enhancing website ranking in search engines compared to JPG.
Structure
WEBP and JPG files are comparable in file type, color support, and bit depth. Both file types are raster graphics formats, and each supports 24-bit RGB color with an 8-bit alpha channel. That is, both file formats use 8 bits for each of the RGB color channels, totaling 24-bit RBG color support.
JPG consists of a series of segments, each starting with a marker. Every marker starts with an OxFF, closely trailed by a byte that indicates the marker type. WEBP, on the other hand, comprises a container based on RIFF, VP8, or VPL8 image data and a libwebp library acting as locus execution for specifying WEBP files.
A JPG file can record 256 (28) levels of RGB. Unlike WEPB, JPG’s bit depth includes a full RGB spectrum, making it suitable for complex graphics and photographs. However, a WEBP image is both a low- and high-resolution file format, while JPG is a high-resolution format.
Animation
The WEBP file format supports animation, unlike JPG files. It can handle motion-based pictures using its built-in capability or support. This ability gives WEBP a competitive edge over JPG, offering comprehensive solutions to various images.
JPG has non-rectangular graphics or logos that feature many texts, which cannot function properly to support animation.
Storage
WEBP images are smaller than JPG images, freeing up more user storage space. Reducing bandwidths allows both image formats to be compressed into more manageable sizes.
WEPB are stored in compressed Format in a container format depending on Resource Interchange File Format (RIFF). However, both file formats use identical storage mediums, namely hard disks, file systems, cloud, and floppy drives.
Compression
A WEBP file format combines high-quality images with smaller file sizes by supporting superior lossy and lossless compression for online images. Nonetheless, WEBP and JPG file formats use lossy compression techniques to allow users to define the percentage level of compression and strike a balance between file size and quality.
A JPG file only uses a lossy compression technique, which selectively deletes certain image information to minimize file sizes. Conversely, WEBP's lossy compression method effectively curtails file size for images and photographs while ensuring good visual quality.
Lossless WEBP compression ensures all image data is preserved without quality degradation. Thus, compared to JPG, WEBP compression techniques allow users to create 25 to 34% small-sized crisp images that enhance web responsiveness.
Browser Support
WEBP is a new file format compared to JPG. Yet, it is only widely supported and highly compatible with top-ranked modern browsers, including Mozilla Firefox, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, and Opera.
Older browsers like Internet Explorer, Edge 12 -17, and Firefox 2-64 hardly support WEBP, notwithstanding its broad compatibility. In unsupported cases, JPG can be the better option.
JPG stands out in terms of device and browser support compared to WEBP. The file format enjoys the universal support of almost all browsers. Thus, where WEBP is not supported, JPG can be used to ensure that all users can file files or images.
Convert WEBP to JPG or JPG to WEBP
WEBP offers top-notch compression without compromising image quality, making it the best choice for high-quality and performance-based websites. JPG, on the other hand, is well-suited for fine-detailed and complex images. Thus, the strengths of each file format make it crucial to strike a balance between website speed and image quality to optimize website content.