Shrink photos for email, forms and websites. Choose your own quality and size.
Compression and resizing are not the same thing, and confusing them is why people end up with ugly images. Compression keeps the image's dimensions and stores each pixel less precisely. Resizing reduces how many pixels there are in the first place.
Reach for resizing first. A photo from a modern phone is often 4000 pixels or more across, while a form, an email or a web page rarely needs more than 1920. Cutting the width in half removes three quarters of the pixels and therefore most of the file size, with no visible loss at all when the image is displayed at a sensible size.
Only once the dimensions are reasonable should you lower the quality slider. Done in that order, a 6MB photo routinely lands under 300KB while still looking clean.
Between 90 and 100 percent, the file stays large and the quality is effectively perfect. This range is worth it only for printing or further editing.
Between 75 and 90 is the sweet spot for almost everything. At 85% most people cannot tell a compressed photo from the original, even side by side, and the file is a fraction of the size.
Between 60 and 75 the image is still perfectly usable for the web and for email, with slight softening visible if you go looking for it on a large screen.
Below 60, compression artefacts become obvious: blockiness in smooth areas like skies, and a halo of noise around text and sharp edges. Use it only when a strict size limit leaves you no choice.
WebP produces the smallest files at any given quality, often 30% smaller than the equivalent JPG, and every current browser supports it. If the images are for your own website, this is the right choice.
JPG is the safe default for anything you are sending to another person or uploading to a form, since it opens anywhere without question.
PNG is the wrong tool for compressing photographs, because it is lossless and the quality slider has no effect on it. Keep PNG only when you need transparency or perfectly sharp graphics, and accept the larger file that comes with it.
On a website, images usually account for most of the page weight, and page speed affects both how many visitors stay and how Google ranks the page. Halving your image sizes is often the single most effective speed improvement available.
For everyday use it is simpler than that: attachments send, forms accept, cloud storage stretches further, and pages load properly on a weak mobile connection.
It depends on the photo, but dropping quality to around 70% and capping the width at 1920px often cuts a photo to a fraction of its original size with little visible change.
WebP usually gives the smallest file for websites. JPG is the safest choice when the file has to open anywhere.
Yes. Lower the quality slider and pick a smaller maximum width, then check the new size shown next to each file before downloading.