4 ms·
Show HN: WebPtoPNG – I built a WebP to PNG tool, everything runs in the browser
I built WebPtoPNG after getting frustrated with converters that throttle uploads or phone data; everything runs straight in the browser, and never asks for a signup.
- Evidlo 9mo agoSome ideas for improvements: - Can you support more formats besides Webp and PNG? - Too much text on the interface - This reads more like a landing page for a startup than a SPA tool. Compare to e.g. [0] [0]: https://dinoosauro.github.io/image-converter/ https://dinoosauro.github.io/image-converter/
- xeonmc 9mo agoAlso, the aesthetic design is too "professional" and therefore not trustworthy. A trustworthy utility page should look like a CSS-less crappy HTML form.
- breve 9mo ago> I built WebPtoPNG after getting frustrated with converters that throttle uploads or phone data Why would you want to do it in a browser anyway? Just run it local. There are many open source image editors and converters to choose from. ImageMagick is one: https://imagemagick.org/ https://imagemagick.org/ GIMP is another: https://www.gimp.org/ https://www.gimp.org/ Krita is another: https://krita.org/en/ https://krita.org/en/
- zipping1549 9mo agoWhy use GUI at all? ffmpeg does it one-liner, a very long one.
- RealStickman_ 9mo agoImagemagick also does it in the terminal. Chances are about as good as ffmpeg that you have it installed already
- xeonmc 9mo agoPeople don't want to install/download/vet reputation of local apps for spontaneous, one-off tasks.
- baobun 9mo ago50/50 you have either ImageMagick or ffmpeg installed already.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- breve 9mo agoBut people will vet a website that has the potential to change every day? Each time you visit the site the behaviour could be different. Vetting the site every time you use it would be profoundly tedious. When you install an application you can vet the version you want to use, keep the installer so you can always reinstall the same version, and it only changes when you change it. That's much better control. Luckily, all of the image editors I listed are well known and trustworthy. They're good tools. You're much better off learning them and making full use of their capability than using some limited web based image converter.
- bcye 9mo agoYou only need to vet the website if you care about the privacy of the picture, and a website is run in a reliably sandboxed environment, whereas local tools run with much more elevated permissions.
- pwdisswordfishy 9mo agoAlthough I can't speak for everyone, my browser runs locally.
- DaleCurtis 9mo agoFWIW, you can do this with a few lines of JS in the browser using canvas.drawImage() from an img element followed by canvas.toBlob().
- fouc 9mo agoThat would require a browser that supports WebP
- theandrewbailey 9mo ago...which is, like, all of them released over the past 5 years: https://caniuse.com/webp https://caniuse.com/webp
- valadaptive 9mo agoFirefox now adds random noise to all canvas readback operations (getImageData, toDataURL, and toBlob).
- DaleCurtis 9mo agoAh, I didn't realize that always happened. I thought it was only if you did something that might have OS specific rendering characteristics (text-draws, etc). Maybe having an ImageEncoder API might be worthwhile after all then https://github.com/w3c/webcodecs/issues/204 https://github.com/w3c/webcodecs/issues/204.
- fouc 9mo agoDoes this work on a browser that doesn't support WebP? That would be useful.
- Yash16 9mo agoDo you support integrations or provide open-source APIs? I want to integrate this with https://picxstudio.com https://picxstudio.com and enable easy, browser-based downloads in multiple image formats.
- gethly 9mo agoYou can compile VIPS or similar library into WASM and avoid doing much work yourself.
- alexpham14 9mo agoI appreciate the meticulousness of the website.