PNG vs WEBP

I know that larger WEBP images are significantly smaller in KB size that the same image as a PNG. When I am creating modules I am moving all my graphics to WEBP now that it is supported. However, I have noticed that small graphics for things like tokens and map markers tend to be larger as WEBP vs PNG.

For example, I have created map markers that are 79x79 pixels in size, they have a small colored border in orange, a white background, and an orange number in the middle (see attached example).

This file as a PNG is 7.19KB and as a WEBP is 13.8KB in size.

I realize the difference is pretty insignificant, but does it matter from an engine perspective?

Just curious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stargrove

I know that larger WEBP images are significantly smaller in KB size that the same image as a PNG. When I am creating modules I am moving all my graphics to WEBP now that it is supported. However, I have noticed that small graphics for things like tokens and map markers tend to be larger as WEBP vs PNG.

For example, I have created map markers that are 79x79 pixels in size, they have a small colored border in orange, a white background, and an orange number in the middle (see attached example).

This file as a PNG is 7.19KB and as a WEBP is 13.8KB in size.

I realize the difference is pretty insignificant, but does it matter from an engine perspective?

Just curious.

---

The file format isn't important once the image is loaded. You should use whichever format works best for you.

https://developers.google.com/speed/...s_source_image