6 ms·

So how did you end up doing it? It’s indeed not super easy on macOS, I imagine you’d use a website to convert it or get ImageMagick through brew. On Windows I

So how did you end up doing it? It’s indeed not super easy on macOS, I imagine you’d use a website to convert it or get ImageMagick through brew. On Windows I wonder if the photo app supports it, in which case you’d hopefully just double click the image and then save a copy, but unfortunately I cannot try that right now. I think ideally Slack should be able to convert on the fly, just like creating low quality versions for thumbnails. It’s a paid service after all! But that doesn’t change the current predicament. I personally too use PNG for graphic, and JPG for pictures even today, despite Lighthouse suggesting I add WebP extras. It’s just so much easier and more portable with so little to gain by doing it.

bArray 7y ago
> So how did you end up doing it? I ended up using an online converter [1] as Gimp and Imagick wasn't having any of it (at the time). Someone in these comments suggested using ffmpeg as an alternative. > I think ideally Slack should be able to convert on the > fly, just like creating low quality versions for > thumbnails. It’s a paid service after all! But that > doesn’t change the current predicament. I would mostly agree with you, but these days I'm easily pleased when these types of services do the simple things well. They are only really incentivized to support the most popular image types anyway. > I personally too use PNG for graphic, and JPG for pictures > even today, despite Lighthouse suggesting I add WebP > extras. It’s just so much easier and more portable with so > little to gain by doing it. This is what really answers why we still use them, it's convenient. To the average user, the difference between 90kB and 80kB images is not worth losing sleep over. If you were serving that image several million times a day I could imagine it's slightly more pressing. As an aside I sometimes use my Sony Mavica (floppy disk camera) and that thing outputs valid JPEGs that I can upload to anywhere. (I use it as mostly a joke, but I also love the idea of having a limited number of pictures and keeping old tech going.) [1] https://ezgif.com/webp-to-jpg https://ezgif.com/webp-to-jpg

bArray 7y ago

> So how did you end up doing it? I ended up using an online converter [1] as Gimp and Imagick wasn't having any of it (at the time). Someone in these comments suggested using ffmpeg as an alternative. > I think ideally Slack should be able to convert on the > fly, just like creating low quality versions for > thumbnails. It’s a paid service after all! But that > doesn’t change the current predicament. I would mostly agree with you, but these days I'm easily pleased when these types of services do the simple things well. They are only really incentivized to support the most popular image types anyway. > I personally too use PNG for graphic, and JPG for pictures > even today, despite Lighthouse suggesting I add WebP > extras. It’s just so much easier and more portable with so > little to gain by doing it. This is what really answers why we still use them, it's convenient. To the average user, the difference between 90kB and 80kB images is not worth losing sleep over. If you were serving that image several million times a day I could imagine it's slightly more pressing. As an aside I sometimes use my Sony Mavica (floppy disk camera) and that thing outputs valid JPEGs that I can upload to anywhere. (I use it as mostly a joke, but I also love the idea of having a limited number of pictures and keeping old tech going.) [1] https://ezgif.com/webp-to-jpg https://ezgif.com/webp-to-jpg