PNG vs JPG: Which Should You Use?

Use PNG for transparency, screenshots, logos and diagrams. Use JPG for photographs. Those 2 rules settle almost every case, and you rarely need to think about the decision for more than a few seconds.

Work down the list below and stop at the first yes. If none of the questions apply, the honest answer in 2026 is to use WebP, which handles both kinds of image better than either older format.

The 4 questions that decide it

• Does it need a transparent background? Use PNG.
• Is it a screenshot, logo, diagram or anything with sharp edges and flat colour? Use PNG.
• Is it a photograph? Use JPEG.
• Will it be edited and re-saved repeatedly? Use PNG, because JPEG loses a little every time.

Why the 2 formats behave differently

PNG stores every pixel exactly, while JPEG discards detail the eye is unlikely to notice. That single difference explains every recommendation in this article.

PNG compression finds repetition and describes it efficiently, which works brilliantly on flat colour and badly on photographic noise. JPEG compression breaks the image into blocks and simplifies the detail inside each one, which works brilliantly on gradual photographic change and badly on sharp edges. Each format is efficient on exactly the content the other handles poorly.

What happens when you choose wrongly

A photograph saved as PNG becomes 3 to 5 times larger than necessary, and a screenshot saved as JPEG develops visible halos around text. Both mistakes are common and both are easy to see.

The screenshot row surprises people most. JPEG produces a larger file than PNG on flat graphics and damages the text at the same time, which is the worst possible combination.

Transparency is the rule with no exception

JPEG has no transparency channel, so a transparent background becomes solid white during conversion. No quality setting changes this, because the format has nowhere to record the information.

The failure shows up as a white box behind a logo placed on a coloured page. Where transparency is needed, the choice is PNG or WebP. WebP supports transparency and lossy compression together, which is the one thing neither older format can do, and it usually produces a file 25 to 35 percent smaller than the PNG equivalent.

Why JPEG degrades with repeated saving

Each JPEG save discards detail permanently, and the losses accumulate across saves. Opening a JPEG, making a small edit and saving it again is not a neutral operation.

After 5 or 6 rounds the damage becomes visible as blockiness in smooth areas and halos around edges. PNG never has this problem, because it rebuilds the image exactly every time. Keep working files as PNG or in your editor native format, and export JPEG only as the final delivery copy.

Screenshots are almost always PNG

Screenshots contain text, interface edges and flat colour, which is exactly the content PNG stores efficiently and JPEG damages. Text is the giveaway, since JPEG artefacts around letters are easy to spot.

One exception exists. A screenshot of a photograph, a video frame or a game is photographic content in a screenshot wrapper, and JPEG handles it correctly. Judge by what is in the picture rather than by how the file was created.

What quality setting to use for JPEG

Use quality 85 for general use and quality 75 for web images, because the visible difference between them is small and the file size difference is large. Quality 100 roughly doubles the file for no visible gain.

• Quality 90 to 95 for archives, printing and photographs you will edit later.
• Quality 80 to 85 for general use, where the loss is invisible at normal viewing size.
• Quality 70 to 75 for web pages, which is where most sites should sit.
• Quality 50 to 65 only when a tight upload limit forces it.
• Quality 100 for nothing, since JPEG remains lossy even at its maximum setting.

How to reduce a PNG that is too large

PNG has no quality slider, so use these 4 approaches instead, in order of effect.

1. Reduce the dimensions, which is free and usually the biggest win. Nobody needs a 5000 pixel screenshot.
2. Reduce the colour depth, which works well on flat graphics and badly on photographs.
3. Crop away unused areas, since whitespace still costs file size.
4. Convert to WebP, which keeps transparency and typically lands 25 to 35 percent smaller.

When JPG is required regardless of the content

Government portals, exam forms and most print services accept JPG only, whatever the image contains. The rule about content gives way to the rule about the destination.

Scanned documents are the awkward case, since a page of text is flat graphic content that PNG would store better, while the portal demands JPG. Scan in greyscale, keep the resolution near 300 dots per inch, and use quality 85 or higher so the text stays readable. The result will be larger than a PNG would have been and will actually upload.

Does PNG really mean better quality

PNG is lossless, which is not the same as better looking. A photograph saved as PNG looks identical to the same photograph at JPEG quality 90, while occupying 5 times the space.

The confusion comes from the word lossless, which describes how the file is stored rather than how the image appears. Lossless matters when a file will be edited repeatedly or when exact pixel values are required. For a photograph published once and viewed on a screen, the distinction has no visible consequence.

Where WebP fits between the 2

WebP offers both a lossy mode for photographs and a lossless mode for graphics, plus transparency in either. The format removes the need to choose in most web situations.

Every current browser supports WebP, so a website has no reason to prefer PNG or JPEG on compatibility grounds. Keep the older formats for files that leave the browser, including upload forms, email attachments, press kits and anything heading to a printer, where WebP support is still thin.

Converting between the 2 formats

Converting PNG to JPG reduces file size and removes transparency. Converting JPG to PNG increases file size and recovers nothing. The second direction is the one people get wrong.

Detail already discarded by JPEG compression cannot be restored by saving into a lossless format. Converting a JPEG to PNG produces a larger file containing the same damaged image, which is occasionally useful when a system demands PNG and never useful for quality. Convert from the highest quality source you have rather than from a delivery copy.

Converting a folder in one pass

Convert a whole library at once rather than file by file, since format decisions usually apply to a whole category of images. A folder of screenshots wants PNG, and a folder of product photographs wants JPG or WebP.

Drop up to 500 files in at once, or drag a ZIP archive straight in, and every image comes back converted to the same specification. Everything runs inside your browser on your own processor, so client work, unpublished designs and internal screenshots never reach a server. Nothing is uploaded, which means there is no retention policy to read and nothing stored anywhere afterwards.

Sort the library into photographs and graphics before converting, since the correct format differs between the 2 groups. That single sorting step is what turns a format decision into a batch job, and it is the reason the 4 questions at the top of this article are worth answering once per folder rather than once per file.