I've Sent Files That Were Way Too Big — Here's What I Do Now
A few months ago I submitted a batch of blog photos and the editor came back asking why every image was over 3MB. I had no good answer. I'd just exported straight from my photo editor without thinking. After some embarrassing back-and-forth, I found a workflow that actually works: drop the files here, set quality to 80, choose WebP, done. The same photos came out under 200KB each — and I genuinely couldn't tell the difference on screen.
How to use this compressor
- Upload your JPG, PNG, or WebP (up to 30 files at once).
- Set quality to 80 as a starting point — most photos look identical to the original at this setting.
- Choose WebP as output unless you specifically need JPG or PNG compatibility.
- Click Compress and download.
Upload Images
or click to browse
What I learned from compressing thousands of images the wrong way first
I used to think "compress" meant one thing: make the file smaller. I'd drag everything into a tool, hit compress, and wonder why some images came out blocky while others looked completely fine. It took me embarrassingly long to realize the format matters as much as the quality number — and that "Same as input" is almost never the best choice.
The setting I always start with — and why
My default is quality 80, output WebP. I arrived at this after months of running side-by-side comparisons on my own photos. Below 75, I start noticing softness around edges on any image with text or sharp lines. Above 85, the file size climbs without any visible benefit on screen. The 80 sweet spot holds up across portraits, product shots, and landscapes.
WebP over JPG is a no-brainer for anything going on a website. I've consistently seen 25–40% smaller files at the same quality number. The only time I switch to JPG is when someone specifically needs a JPG — email attachments, print services, platforms with explicit JPG requirements.
The "Same as input" trap I fell into
For a long time I used "Same as input" because it felt safe. But here's what I didn't realize: if I had a 4MB PNG photo and compressed it at quality 80 with "Same as input," I got a 3.2MB PNG. The same file at quality 80 output as WebP was 380KB. That's a 10× difference.
"Same as input" makes sense in one scenario: when I'm compressing within a format and compatibility matters — like reducing an oversized JPG that's going into an email template where WebP might not render correctly. For web delivery, I always switch to WebP.
When quality 80 isn't enough — and when to go lower
- Product photos with text overlays: I stay at 85. The text edges get slightly soft at 80 and it bothers me.
- Natural landscape photos: I'll go to 70 comfortably. Grass, sky, and water absorb compression well — there's nothing sharp enough to show artifacts.
- Screenshots: I use PNG output regardless of quality setting. JPG and WebP lossy compression creates halos around UI text that look wrong.
- Thumbnails at 150px or smaller: I compress aggressively at 60–65. Nobody can see the difference at thumbnail size.
One thing I check before compressing: has this JPG already been compressed?
If I receive a JPG that's already been through several rounds of editing and saving, compressing it further doesn't just reduce size — it stacks new artifacts on top of old ones. I've seen this go wrong when a client sends me a logo that's been copied, pasted, screenshot, and saved six times. Compressing that at quality 75 makes it look noticeably worse.
My rule: if the original is from a camera or a clean export, compress freely. If it looks like it's already been processed multiple times, use quality 85 or higher and accept the larger file.
Your files are deleted the moment I'm done with them
Files travel over HTTPS, get processed in temporary storage, and are deleted automatically when the job finishes. I don't store them, review them, or share them. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
What quality should I start with?
Start at 80. If the result looks the same as the original, try 75. If you're compressing logos or images with text, stay at 85.
Why does WebP produce smaller files than JPG at the same quality setting?
The encoders use different algorithms. WebP's compression is simply more efficient at every quality level — the quality scales aren't directly equivalent between formats.
My compressed image looks worse than before. What went wrong?
Check whether the original was already a heavily compressed JPG. You may be experiencing compounded quality loss. Try setting quality to 85 or higher, or find the original source file.
Can I compress 30 images at once?
Yes. Upload up to 30 files and download them as a ZIP when done.
Does this work on mobile?
Yes. Any modern mobile browser works — no app needed.
Other tools that go with this one
I usually resize before compressing — dropping a 4000px photo to 1200px first removes far more data than any compression setting can. Both steps together give the best result.
Resize image · Remove image background · Convert HEIC to JPG
Explore more free tools
Need a different format or workflow? These tools are part of the same Plomz toolkit and work the same way.