TL;DR
Get wellness gear delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Writer and designer Gavin Anderegg says he has started using WebP for some web images after switching to Pixelmator Pro, which he says makes the format easier to work with. His recent examples were smaller than JPEG or PNG files at comparable visual quality, though he says that may not hold in every case. The post is a personal account, not an announcement of a wider industry change.
Gavin Anderegg says he has begun using WebP for some images on the web after switching from Photoshop to Pixelmator Pro, which he says offers a more convenient workflow for the format. In a post published October 8, he wrote that WebP files in two recent examples were smaller than JPEG or PNG files at similar visual quality, a change that matters mainly to people preparing and serving web images.
Anderegg said he had relied mainly on JPEG, PNG and SVG for more than 20 years and had previously found WebP inconvenient. His view changed after moving from Photoshop to Pixelmator Pro, which he says gives him better tools for working with WebP. He used the format in his two most recent posts about Apple’s Liquid Glass design and found that it produced smaller files than JPEG or PNG at what he judged to be the same visual quality.
He qualified that result: WebP will not always be smaller, and his observation comes from his own image work rather than a broad comparison. He said he had not yet encountered a case in which WebP performed worse for his purposes. The post does not provide file sizes, test conditions or a numerical measure of image quality, so readers cannot independently compare those examples from the information given.
The article describes a change in one creator’s workflow, not a new WebP release or a formal announcement by Pixelmator. Anderegg also says he is interested in AVIF and JPEG XL, and wonders when Pixelmator Pro might support them. He points to Google’s recent announcement that it was shipping JPEG XL support, but does not give a release date or say when browser support will reach a particular level.
Smaller Images, Easier Workflows
Image format choices affect both the people creating web content and the people who load it. When an image can be saved at comparable perceived quality with a smaller file, it may reduce the amount of data a page needs to deliver. But whether a format is practical also depends on editing software, browser compatibility and export tools. Anderegg’s account illustrates how improved software support can matter as much as the format’s technical properties: WebP was available to him for years, but he says he found it too awkward to use regularly.
The example also gives a useful counterpoint to treating format recommendations as automatic rules. Anderegg recalls that Google’s Lighthouse tool often flagged images that were not WebP, including cases where savings were relatively minor or support for the format was less mature. His experience suggests that a recommendation is most useful when creators can check the actual file and visual result, rather than assuming one format will always win. The post does not establish that WebP will improve every site or image library.
For readers who publish images, the practical takeaway is limited but relevant: test the output in your own workflow. File size, image content, quality settings and the tools used to export can all affect the result. A format that works well for one person’s graphics may not be the best choice for every photograph, illustration or publishing system.
Pixelmator Pro image editing software
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
WebP’s Long Road to Adoption
Google announced WebP in 2010. Anderegg’s account traces browser support arriving over several years: Chrome added it in 2011, Edge in 2018, Firefox in 2019 and Safari in 2020. He says the delay in broader browser support helped keep the format in selective use, including by content delivery networks, rather than making it an easy default for everyone producing web images.
Software support was another obstacle in his experience. Anderegg says Photoshop added native WebP support in 2022, while its “Save for Web” and “Export As” features still did not support the format at the time he wrote. He also recalls disliking WebP partly because Google’s Lighthouse tool encouraged its use before, in his view, the benefits were always clear. These comments describe his experience and assessment; the post does not offer a survey of software users or a comparison of current export features across applications.
Anderegg’s earlier routine included JPEGs and PNGs, with SVG for suitable graphics. He notes that GIFs were also used, though he mainly associated them with memes and says they are now often replaced by smaller video files. His point is not that older formats have disappeared, but that better tooling has made it easier for him to add another option to his regular workflow.
“I guess I’m using WebP now?”
— Gavin Anderegg, in his October 8, 2026 post
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Limits of the File Comparisons
The post does not list the images’ file sizes, export settings or test method, and it does not quantify how closely the WebP files matched the JPEG or PNG versions visually. It is also not clear whether the results would carry over to other types of image or to other creators’ software setups. Anderegg says directly that WebP will not always produce the smaller file.
The article also leaves open when Pixelmator Pro might add support for AVIF or JPEG XL. Although Anderegg says Google had announced it was shipping JPEG XL support, he does not provide details about which products or versions were involved, a timetable for wider browser support, or what that support will mean for his own workflow. Those questions require information beyond the personal account.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Other Formats on His Radar
Anderegg says he is watching for Pixelmator Pro support for AVIF and JPEG XL, with AVIF particularly appealing to him. He hopes those formats will be easier to use without the long wait he experienced with WebP. The post gives no date for any future Pixelmator Pro support, so readers should treat that as his expectation rather than a product commitment.
For now, the confirmed development is a personal change: Anderegg has started using WebP where it has worked well in his recent posts. Further developments to watch include updates to editing and export tools, browser support for newer formats and his own reported results from using them. Whether those formats become part of his regular workflow remains open.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
What changed in Gavin Anderegg’s image workflow?
He says he has begun using WebP for some web images after moving from Photoshop to Pixelmator Pro, which he finds easier to use for the format.
Why did he previously avoid WebP?
Anderegg says WebP was inconvenient to work with, and that browser and image-editing software support took time to develop. He also felt recommendations for the format could be made when the savings were small or support was still immature.
Did WebP make every image smaller?
No. Anderegg says WebP was smaller in his two recent examples at similar visual quality, but adds that this will not always be the case. He does not publish file sizes or a standardized test.
Is Pixelmator Pro adding AVIF or JPEG XL?
The post does not confirm that either format is coming to Pixelmator Pro or provide a schedule. Anderegg says he is wondering when the software might support them.
Does the post mean web publishers should stop using JPEG or PNG?
No. It reports one creator’s experience, not a universal recommendation. The best choice can depend on the image, export settings, software and the needs of the site.
Source: hn
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
