JPG vs PNG: which one should you actually use?
By the Converterzilla Team
We build privacy-first PDF and image tools that run entirely in your browser. Our team has shipped JavaScript file-processing apps used by thousands every day, and we write here about the libraries, trade-offs and patterns we use.
JPG and PNG together cover 90% of everyday image work, but the choice between them isn't intuitive. Pick wrong and you either get blurry photos (JPG-too-aggressive) or 10 MB screenshots (PNG-where-JPG-would-do).
The rule of thumb
JPG for photos. PNG for everything else. JPG's lossy compression is brilliant for photographs because the human eye doesn't notice the discarded information. PNG's lossless compression preserves every pixel exactly — perfect for graphics with sharp edges, text, or transparency.
When PNG wins
- Screenshots — every pixel of UI matters
- Logos and graphics — sharp edges turn fuzzy in JPG
- Transparent backgrounds — JPG doesn't support transparency
- Pixel art — JPG mangles it
When JPG wins
- Photos — visual quality at a fraction of the size
- Web images where bandwidth matters
- Email attachments where size limits matter
The exception: WebP
If you're serving images to a website, WebP often beats both — better compression than JPG with optional transparency. It's supported in every modern browser. The downside: outside the web, support is patchy.
Need to convert? Our JPG ↔ PNG converter does both directions in batch, in your browser, with optional WebP output via the universal converter.