JPG, PNG, WebP or AVIF — Which Image Format Should You Choose?

When saving an image, the same question almost always comes up: JPG, PNG, or maybe WebP? On top of that there's now AVIF, which people say beats them all. The choice isn't cosmetic — the same picture can weigh 2 MB in one format and 300 KB in another, at the same on-screen quality. So let's look at how these formats really differ and when to reach for each.

A quick map of the formats

Each of the four popular formats was built for something different:

• JPG (JPEG) — the veteran for photography. It handles smooth color transitions beautifully, but it doesn't support transparency and loses data on every save.
• PNG — a lossless format with transparency. Ideal for graphics with hard edges, poor for photos because the files get huge.
• WebP — the more modern successor to both. Smaller than JPG at the same quality, supports transparency, and is supported today by every major browser.
• AVIF — the newest and most efficient, but it needs more power to encode and isn't supported everywhere yet.

Lossy or lossless — that's the heart of it

The most important split isn't between "old and new," but between lossy and lossless compression.

Lossy compression (JPG, WebP, AVIF) deliberately throws away some information the eye barely registers anyway. That keeps files small — at the cost of minor artifacts when squeezed hard. Lossless compression (PNG) reproduces every single pixel, but pays for it in size.

Hence a simple rule: photos → a lossy format, graphics with text and lines → PNG. A logo saved as JPG picks up dirty halos around the letters; a photo saved as PNG balloons several times over for no gain.

What to choose in practice

Ordinary photos for a site, blog or store

JPG or WebP. If you care about the smallest weight and don't need to support ancient browsers — WebP. If the file has to open literally everywhere, including old software — JPG. Converting from JPG to WebP is often the quickest way to make a gallery suddenly drop by half.

Logos, icons, screenshots with text, transparency

PNG. Here what matters is edge sharpness and the alpha channel, not maximum slimming. If someone sent you a logo as a JPG with a gray background instead of a transparent one, that's a sign the format was chosen wrong.

Maximum savings and a modern stack

AVIF, but sensibly. It can go even lower than WebP at similar quality, yet encoding is slower and some older devices won't open it. A good compromise is serving AVIF where you can, with WebP or JPG as a fallback.

From what we see: for most sites, switching from JPG to WebP delivers the biggest win for the least effort. AVIF is the next step, worth taking once WebP is already in place and you want to squeeze out the last ten-odd percent.

What about converting the other way?

Sometimes the problem is reversed: you get a file in a new format and have to upload it somewhere that only accepts the old ones. A photo from an iPhone arrives as HEIC, a banner from a designer as WebP, and an upload form insists on "JPG or PNG only." That's when a quick WebP-to-JPG conversion helps — no installs, right in the browser.

FAQ

Which format is best for photos on the web?

For most sites it's WebP — it weighs less than JPG at the same quality and is supported today by every current browser. JPG remains the safest choice when a file has to open literally everywhere.

Does WebP lose quality compared to JPG?

At the same settings, WebP usually looks just as good or better while weighing less. Both are lossy, so avoid saving the same file over and over in a loop.

When should I use PNG?

When you need sharp edges, text or transparency — logos, icons, screenshots, interface graphics. For photographs, PNG is a waste of space.

Is it worth switching to AVIF already?

If WebP is in place and you want to go even lower in weight, yes — but ideally with a fallback for older devices. For most projects, WebP is more than enough.