Image Compressor
Shrink a photo for email, a web page, or an upload limit, and see exactly how many bytes you saved before you download anything.
1. Choose an image
Your picture is opened by this page alone. It is never sent anywhere, and closing the tab forgets it.
Choose an image, or drop one here
You can also paste an image with Ctrl or Command and V
JPG, PNG, or WebP
Choose an image to begin. Nothing is uploaded.
2. Result
The compressed image will appear here.
—Original
—Compressed
—Difference
Some files get bigger. Compressing an image that is already well optimised, or asking for very high quality, can produce a larger file than you started with. The tool measures the real result and says so rather than claiming a saving that did not happen. If the number goes up, lower the quality or set a smaller longest side.
How to compress an image well
Pick a sensible target
Most websites display images at 1200 to 1600 pixels wide. Anything much larger is wasted on almost every page.
Watch the saving, not the slider
Quality 75 and quality 90 can look the same on screen and differ by half the file size. The panel reports what each setting actually costs.
Use WebP where you can
It is usually 25 to 35 percent smaller than JPG at a similar quality. Keep a JPG as well for anything that has to go to software that is not on the web.
The number it reports is measured, not guessed
The saving shown next to your file is the difference between the size you brought in and the size that actually came out of the encoder. It is not an estimate derived from the quality slider, and the difference matters more than it sounds.
Those two things genuinely disagree. At a mid quality setting a flat graphic such as a logo, a screenshot or a diagram can come out larger than the original, because there was nothing wasteful to remove and the re-encode only added overhead. And a very high quality setting can undo a resize, producing a file bigger than the one you started with after asking for a smaller picture. A tool that estimated from the slider would promise a saving in both cases and be wrong. This one encodes the image and weighs the result, which costs a second pass and is the only way to be honest about it.
Start from the lowest quality that still looks right
Move the slider up and down and watch the measured figure, rather than aiming at a particular number on the slider. Find the lowest setting at which the picture still looks acceptable to you, and stop there. Below that point the saving is real and the picture is not worth it.
Scaling down is where most of the saving comes from
Cutting the longest edge to a maximum size removes actual pixels, and pixels are what a file is made of. It is a bigger lever than the quality setting and it is not a compromise at all, provided the smaller size is still big enough for where it will be seen. A photograph on a website rarely needs the resolution of one on a camera.
Order matters: reducing the dimensions first and then setting a modest quality gives a predictable result. A high quality setting after a large reduction can hand back some of the size you just saved.
It re-encodes, so metadata goes
The result is drawn to a fresh canvas and written out as a new file, so EXIF data including GPS coordinates is not carried over. For a photo you took at home or at work, that is often the point. If you need the original data preserved, keep the original file, because the compressed copy will not have it.
Pictures that do not compress
Images that are already heavily compressed, and images that are mostly one flat colour, have very little slack to remove. For a logo or a screenshot, a PNG is usually a better answer than a smaller JPG, and the WebP to JPG or PNG tool will tell you what the honest file size is before you commit.
Your original is untouched
Everything happens on a copy in the page. The file on your disk is not modified, so the compressed version is a second file rather than a replacement, and you can compare the two at full size before you use it.