> I wonder if there's some issue with the WebP encoder (or the settings) he is using? I played around with online optimizers and IrfanView which I had locally.

> I wonder if there's some issue with the WebP encoder (or the settings) he is using? I played around with online optimizers and IrfanView which I had locally. IrfanView got the results they did, no matter what else I tuned, obvious degradation at 90. Online optimizers were not even comparable in how bad they were. edit: I found Squoosh [0], which has WebP V2 compression marked as unstable. It’s far better, half the size of JPEG 90, but it’s still degraded in comparison. Also, it saves as wp2 file, which neither Chrome nor FF support natively. [0]: https://squoosh.app/editor https://squoosh.app/editor