By converting a file to another file extension, you can use other programs to service it. But we should not forget that the WEBP file, when converted to JPG, may differ slightly from the original, for example in the placement of data. The most vital information should be saved, but if you are interested in the file being identical after converting from WEBP to JPG, you should act judiciously and select the appropriate application from the list below. This doesn't guarantee that the conversion will be 100% as expected, but it can still help a lot. If, nevertheless, the effect of converting the WEBP file to JPG did not meet your expectations, you can try to find on the Internet another version of your file in the WEBP format, previously correctly converted by someone else into a JPG file. If this does not work for you, use the information presented in the next section.
Programs for converting WEBP to JPG:
What other possibilities are there?
Unfortunately, if after performing the two previously described actions (trying to find your WEBP files converted by someone else, and trying to convert it yourself into JPG format) there is still a problem with the file, there are few solutions left. You can try again to search and install an application that can open the WEBP file in its original format (without converting to JPG file. This decision will be difficult to implement, but will undoubtedly bring the best result.
The main thing is to specify the file on your computer or phone, specify required format images, click OK. The rest of the settings are set to default.
Supported image formats:
3FR, AAI, A.I., ART, ARW, AVS, BGR, BGRA, BIE, BMP, CAL, CALS, CANVAS, CIN, CMYK, CMYKA, CR2(Canon Digital Camera Raw Image Format), CRW, CUR, DCM, DCR, DCX, DDS, DIB, DJVU, DNG, DPX, EPDF, EPS, EPSF, EPSI, EPT, ERF, EXR, FAX, FITS, FRACTAL, FTS, G3, GIF, GIF87, GRAY, GROUP4, HDR, HRZ, ICB, ICO, ICON, IIQ, JBG, JBIG, JNG, JNX, JP2,JPE JPEG, JPG,JSON, K25(Kodak Digital Camera Raw Image Format), K.D.C., MAC, MAT, MEF, MIFF, MNG, MONO, MPC, MRW, MTV, NEF(Nikon Digital SLR Camera Raw Image File), NRW, ORF(Olympus Digital Camera Raw Image File), OTB, OTF, PAL, PALM, PAM, PBM, PCD, PCDS, PCT, PCX, PDB, PDF, PDFA, PEF, PES, PFM, PGM, PICON, PICT, PIX, PJPEG, PLASMA, PNG, PNG00, PNG8, PNG24, PNG32, PNG48, PNG64, PNM, PS, PSB, PSD, PTIF, PWP, R, RAF, RAS, RAW, RGB, RGBA, RGBO, RGF, RLA, RLE, RMF(Raw Media Format) RW2(Panasonic Lumix Raw Image), SFW, SGI, SIX, SIXEL, SR2(Sony Raw Format 2) SRF, STEGANO, SUN, TGA, TIF, TIFF, TIFF64, TILE, UYVY, VDA, VICAR, VIFF, VIPS, VST, WBMP, WEBP, WPG, XBM, XCF(GIMP image), XWD, X3F(Sigma RAW Picture File)
The original image is not changed in any way. You will be provided with another processed image.
Supported RAW (raw) photo formats With automatic correction and taking into account the built-in metadata:
.3FR, .FFF Hasselblad Hasselblad RAW Image
.ARW, .SR2, .SRF- RAW photo from digital camera Sony,Sony Digital Camera RAW Image
.BAY- RAW photo from a digital camera Casio, Casio RAW Image
.CR2, .CRW- RAW photo from a digital camera Canon, Canon RAW Image
.DC2, .DCR, .K25, .KC2, .KDC- RAW photo from a digital camera Kodak Kodak RAW Image File
.DNG- digital negative, Digital Negative Image File
.ERF- raw image Epson, Epson RAW File
.HDR- High Dynamic Range image
.MDC, .MRW- Minolta Raw Image File
.MEF, .MOS- Mamiya Digital Camera RAW Image Format
.NEF, .NRW- RAW photo from digital SLR camera Nikon Nikon Raw Image File
.ORF- RAW photo from a digital camera Olympus, Olympus RAW File
.PEF - Pentax Electronic File
.PXN- PictureWorks PhotoEnhancer Image
.QTK - Apple QuickTake Picture Image
.RAF - Fujifilm CCD-RAW Graphic File
.RAW- Digital Camera Photo RAW Image Format
.RW2 Panasonic, Panasonic RAW Image
.SRW- RAW photo from camera Samsung
.X3F - RAW image from a digital camera Sigma, Sigma Camera RAW Picture File
The service allows you to convert (convert) from WebP format to JPG format
WebP is an open-source format graphic files, raster images. Created in 2010 by Google for web graphics in order to load images faster on web pages. This is the main advantage of WebP files. Image compression in this format can be either lossy or lossless, depending on what level of quality you want to achieve. Thus, lossless compression is 26% better than in PNG files. If quality loss is acceptable, then compression in the WebP format is 25-34% better than in JPEG files. There is no full support for WebP in Firefox OS yet, Internet Explorer and Safari.
JPEG is the most common and popular format bitmap. The form received its name from the abbreviation of the name of the development organization, Joint Photographic Experts Group. Files of this format are used today in all digital cameras and cameras. They have a good compression ratio and support 24-bit color depth. Because this compression significantly reduces the size of an image with virtually no loss of quality, the JPEG format is widely used on the Internet. However, the stronger the compression, the worse the quality. In addition, the JPEG format does not support the transparency option.
Reviews
| Usually Google or Yandex displays paid content first, it’s even strange that in a search engine it’s on the first search page |
| The best thing I found on the Internet. I recommend it to everyone. |
| On this moment this is the best site I've ever seen. On others there are either many restrictions, or even everything is paid. Respect to the developers! It would be ideal if it were possible to perform several operations at a time. |
| Super, many thanks to the developers! PS: the “Clear all” button wouldn’t hurt :) |
| super! |
| Wonderful program. Fast. No file renaming. You can download it in one archive. I recommend. |
| Thank you very much for the converter. I looked through a lot of links, but this site is the BEST! |
| Guys, this is something. Super program on converting files from one format to another. |
| Thanks for the help! |
| Very comfortably! |
- Recovery Mode
There are a couple more features of the WebP format. The compression settings are not exactly the same as those in JPEG. Don't expect 50% JPEG quality to match 50% WebP quality. In the case of WebP, the quality drops quite rapidly, so it is better to start with the highest values and gradually decrease them. Another plus in favor of WebP is the ability to add an alpha channel mask, just like PNG. Unlike competing formats, you can compress a WebP image to one-tenth the size of the image in PNG format. This is really where WebP stands out.
One example from life: PNG file 880Kb size (24-bit image with alpha channel) was compressed to 41Kb - 95% compression! Although this is not a common situation, the possibilities of WebP are clearly visible. 
The difference is in the quality of textures. (Full version)
To further reduce the file size, we can not include metadata by unchecking the “Save Metadata” checkbox in the image editor’s save window. For even better results, you can select “lossy alpha channel”.
Quality settings for the alpha channel are applied to the image itself. For example, 50% quality images will have 50% alpha quality. In our testing, we expected distortion at the edge of the mask, but there were also noticeable changes to the entire image. Of course, this is an option to further reduce the size, but then you need to be very careful about image quality.
Also, pay attention to the unwanted banding in the alpha channel. 
The difference is in the quality of the alpha channel. (Full version)
We were very happy when we discovered the WebP Plugin for Photoshop. With it you can easily adjust the quality of WebP images. True, the plugin interface leaves much to be desired. At this time, you cannot view the image to evaluate quality parameters. 
WebP Plugin for Photoshop.
As a workaround, you can compare the files in Google Chrome. Opening the Save dialog box is also awkward in Photoshop. For this we have appointed hotkey to avoid using the dialog box all the time. Despite the inconvenience, it is still worth it.
With excellent compression performance, good quality and alpha channel, WebP looks like a good contender for current image formats.
Despite promising testing results, there is no clear leader among all formats. While WebP performs impressively among other formats, JPEG and 8-bit PNG are sometimes still superior to WebP in size and/or quality. Therefore, we advise you to do your own testing before you transfer all your images to WebP, because it may not fully meet your requirements.
Implementation
Having determined that WebP could be an effective tool for us, we turned to our developers to implement this format. WebP is fully supported Chrome browsers, Opera, Opera Mini, Android Browser and Chrome for Android. Firefox, Internet Explorer and Safari do not have full support, although Firefox has its own history with WebP. Luckily, there are several ways to display WebP in these browsers.We found 3 ways to support this format. It was important for us to understand that we were using the best tool regarding page size, keeping in mind that Speed Index is a key metric and taking into account any necessary Javascript polyfills.
We conducted 4 tests to determine which format suits us best. The first one used JPEG as a reference, and the other 3 used the approaches described below. We used a JPEG image and a WebP image of the same quality (269Kb JPEG and 52Kb WebP).
In the second test, we enabled WebPJS, a 67Kb polyfill created by Dominik Homberger. It provides WebP support in all modern browsers, even in IE6 and higher. The polyfill is convenient because you don’t need to change the img tag in your code, you just need to change the extension of the images from .jpg and .png to .webp.
The next approach was to use Picturefill, a polyfill that allows you to use a tag even when it is not fully supported. With it, you can use WebP to serve and, if the format is not supported by the browser, serve JPEG, PNG or another format.
The last test was to use the .htaccess file on the server to implement WebP. This variant was developed by Vincent Orbach.
Using it, the code in .htaccess looks to see if there is a WebP version of each image on the page. If the browser supports WebP and a WebP image is available, it is served rather than a JPEG or PNG. This is convenient and does not require changing the web page layout.
After reviewing the results, we concluded that the WebP polyfill (from the second test) is the most lightweight solution that works in all browsers, but we were not satisfied with the Speed Index metric when using this method. The WebP polyfill renders images worse than the JPEG benchmark and worse than other non-iOS implementations. We tend to use this implementation due to better browser support.
It was also noticed that on iOS devices the files took up 100KB more than on other devices. We found that in iOS5.1 in both IE 8 and IE9, the WebP image was loaded 3 times. Although an additional 2 times is not good, it still took up less space than the JPEG equivalent. We haven't tested this in new iOS versions, perhaps it has already been fixed there.
A look into the future
Our team decided to implement the method used in Test 3, using a tag to serve WebP images to browsers that support them and serve JPEGs or PNGs to those that don't know anything about WebP.We believe this The best way progressive enhancement and it supports rendering images in a browser-supported format.
Initially we used the polyfill method, but felt that the result would not be ideal.
WebP won't completely replace JPEG or PNG just yet, but it will be a very cool tool to have in your arsenal.
From the translator: The authors used iOS 5.1 because at the time of testing, the WebPageTest.org site supported only this version of the system. IE8 and IE9 to see how WebP will work in such older browsers + these browsers are still important to their customers. There are now plenty of online versions of converters.
Loading...
