Follow up

• +100

  by Those2Nerds
  on 2024-06-06 15:26

  Not sure how feasible this is for WA to do. I prefer control of my images, but if this is opt-in per-image, it wouldn't interfere with the way I want to do things. It could instead help those who aren't so familiar with image editing and file types. Rather than having to explain to someone how to find and use a third-party app to convert to webp, we can direct people to a checkbox in WA.

• +300

  by Valraven Dreadwood
  on 2024-06-01 20:21

  This is BRILLIANT!! I had never thought of introducing the .webp format as a standard for incoming images. This would save me SO MUCH SPACE!!

• +300

  by bphilippe
  on 2024-05-31 05:19

• +300

  by Jupiter Melichios
  on 2024-05-29 23:00

• +300

  by LeeStepp
  on 2024-05-29 13:06

• +300

  by Satsi Retaffer
  on 2024-05-28 03:43

• +100

  by holydemiurge
  on 2024-05-23 22:58

• +100

  by [email protected]
  on 2024-05-23 18:50

• -100

  by tjtrewin
  on 2024-05-23 18:06

  I prefer to have control over the quality and size of my image optimizations depending on what I need to use them for (cover image, huge map, tiny little image for part of an article, etc) - I may intentionally want certain ones to be higher quality and/or faster than others.   I personally use squoosh.app for this, but there are plenty of alternatives out there.

• -300

  by Cyborg Starfish
  on 2024-05-22 14:51

  Same thing as DesNordlund and Amanchan. Most programs allow you to convert to a .webp format, converting every image in WorldAnvil's servers will likely just cause things to slow down, and you really shouldn't just believe Google's marketing at face value, or any company's marketing at face value. Also, a quick Google search later and I've already stumbled upon articles describing a pretty nasty vulnerability found within .webp files, here is one example: https://blog.cloudflare.com/uncovering-the-hidden-webp-vulnerability-cve-2023-4863. There is a chance that the vulnerability has been fixed by now, but I just wanted to point it out.

• -100

  by Amancham
  on 2024-05-22 10:29

  Reading up on this, I have to go with DesNordlund, tbh. Pick whatever format you prefer when you create your image or work on it in your editor. Most programmes offer webp by now.

• -100

  by DesNordlund
  on 2024-05-22 05:12

  Personally, I don't see the issue here. You rarely upload an image without doing some work with it, right? Then save it in whatever format you please. Besides, what you've read is Google's marketing. There are studies who claim there is no difference in performace. But again, when you work with your image in your editor, save it in whatever format you prefer. It will take prestanda from WorldAnvil's servers to convert every image uploaded.

• +100

  by DramaticDragons
  on 2024-05-22 03:03

• +100

  by GreeneDragon
  on 2024-05-22 02:01

  Sounds like a grand idea

• +300

  by Rahjar
  on 2024-05-22 01:02

  If webp is widespread enough to be considered universal, the saved bytes themselves might just make it worth it. Or is this something the cdn supports? A quick google located this, which may, or may not, be of interest: https://imagekit.io/blog/optimize-resize-images-digitalocean-spaces-real-time-imagekit/

• +300

  by FinalLegacy
  on 2024-05-21 21:20

• +300

  by Pythix
  on 2024-05-21 14:49

• +1

  by Mahdi Avendesora
  on 2024-05-21 12:59

• +1

  by A Revolutionary Skeleton
  on 2024-05-21 09:53

• +300

  by DMFW
  on 2024-05-21 09:07

• +300

  by kaixabu
  on 2024-05-21 07:21