WebP support

What features would you like to see in Pixelmator Pro?
User avatar

2019-04-02 15:13:19

Pixelmator had support for WebP. When will Pixelmator Pro support it?
User avatar

2019-04-08 17:26:31

It seemed to us like WebP was maybe not quite as relevant anymore, at least compared to when it seemed to be on the way to becoming a viable format for the web. What kind of things do you use the format for, just out of interest?
User avatar

2019-06-10 13:24:50

I would like the ability to be able to edit existing webp format images.
User avatar

2019-06-25 16:23:35

by Andrius 2019-04-08 22:26:31 It seemed to us like WebP was maybe not quite as relevant anymore, at least compared to when it seemed to be on the way to becoming a viable format for the web. What kind of things do you use the format for, just out of interest?
All major browsers except for Safari/WebKit support WebP. It's a superior image format and I would like to use WebP as the primary format for my images. Aside from simply supporting the format, perhaps as an enhancement to Export for Web you could make it so it outputs more than one format at a time. For example, if I could output WebP and PNG or WebP and JPG, then I would use the PNG or JPG as a secondary format for WebKit.

<picture>
<source srcset="image.webp" type="image/webp">
<source srcset="image.jpg" type="image/jpeg">
<img src="image.jpg" alt="Alternative Text">
</picture>
User avatar

2019-06-27 14:42:31

Hey Jon, nice to see you on the forum! Thanks for another nudge on this, we'll reconsider this and see if there's anything we can do.
User avatar

2019-11-07 15:13:46

I've recently made the switch from Pixelmator to Pixelmator Pro, and I dearly miss the ability to export to WebP. I use it for web imagery as well as creating WhatsApp stickers, where the small filesize really helps keep app sizes down. It would be nice to see WebP exports return to Pixelmator Pro.
User avatar

2020-03-05 14:16:29

Bump !

We are starting to see more and more webp files online and it sucks to have to convert them in inferior format using an online editor.

It would be really nice to have Pixelmator Pro handle webp files like a big guy
User avatar

2020-03-06 06:10:02

by AnthonyY Bump !

We are starting to see more and more webp files online and it sucks to have to convert them in inferior format using an online editor.

It would be really nice to have Pixelmator Pro handle webp files like a big guy
Why so you use the format. Safari doesn’t support it? There are many devices out there
User avatar

2020-04-14 19:30:35

Chrome marks down your website in its audit tools for using JPEG or PNG, so I need to export to WebP. The <picture> element exists for providing a fallback for Safari
User avatar

2020-04-14 19:44:03

by DannyK 2020-04-15 01:32:14 Chrome marks down your website in its audit tools for using JPEG or PNG, so I need to export to WebP. The &lt;picture&gt; element exists for providing a fallback for Safari
Are you suggesting that using anything other than WebP would affect how your site performs in Google Search? If so, that’s not true. Google doesn’t care what image format you use. They do care how big images are and whether they affect performance, especially on mobile devices and and slower networks.

However, I do want to Pixelmator Pro to support WebP so I could have the option to do what you’re suggesting, which is making WebP the default image type and JPG or PNG the fallback. I don’t understand why this hasn’t been added yet.
User avatar

2020-04-14 22:22:57

by DannyK 2020-04-14 19:30:35 Chrome marks down your website in its audit tools for using JPEG or PNG, so I need to export to WebP. The &lt;picture&gt; element exists for providing a fallback for Safari
I think there are better file formats out there. Heif, but unfortunately Wordpress does not support it. Webp would be better too. I have to look how I could implement it. For seo I don’t think that is even a small one...
User avatar

2020-04-15 08:00:30

by henshaw However, I do want to Pixelmator Pro to support WebP so I could have the option to do what you’re suggesting, which is making WebP the default image type and JPG or PNG the fallback. I don’t understand why this hasn’t been added yet.
The reason is we had a fairly extensive plan for all the updates until now and we just didn't prioritize WebP support in the past. But the good news is we've decided we'd like to add it and now we need to find the time for it. We're still busy finishing up several major new features, which will take up most of our dev time but, as things stand, WebP support is now on our roadmap.
User avatar

2020-04-15 12:41:31

by Andrius 2020-04-15 13:00:30
We're still busy finishing up several major new features, which will take up most of our dev time but, as things stand, WebP support is now on our roadmap.
🎉 💯 Thanks for the update and for putting it on the roadmap.
User avatar

2020-04-15 13:27:57

by henshaw 2020-04-15 09:42:22
🎉 💯 Thanks for the update and for putting it on the roadmap.
No problem, sharing good news is always a pleasure!
User avatar

2020-04-16 05:53:19

It would be great if the export to web function could do export webp and png/jpg at the same time as a fall back for safari. Hopefully Apple and Wordpress are supporting it...

I did a bit of research - overall it’s the better format but in some cases the quality was worse then jpg.

I hope Apple is not licensing heif anymore or make it open source.

So even better compression Then webp with same quality Or better

Thanks pix team for reconsideration
User avatar

2020-06-04 12:47:32

User avatar

2020-06-04 13:55:01

by Andrius 2020-06-04 18:54:51 Oh happy day!
This is great. Thank you!

I was surprised to not see this option in the Format dropdown for Export for Web... Is that because there aren't any optimization options for that format?
User avatar

2020-06-04 14:06:57

The biggest (/only) thing is that Safari doesn't support it yet so we didn't feel entirely comfortable "recommending" it in Export for Web when the main browser that most of us use doesn't yet support it. Safari is also the #1 browser in terms of traffic to our site — not by a huge amount, but still, those kinds of things weigh into decisions like this. But we can certainly add WebP to Export for Web in the future, so we'll keep this in mind moving forward.
User avatar

2020-06-04 14:27:07

by Andrius 2020-06-04 20:07:48 The biggest (/only) thing is that Safari doesn't support it yet so we didn't feel entirely comfortable "recommending" it in Export for Web when the main browser that most of us use doesn't yet support it. Safari is also the #1 browser in terms of traffic to our site — not by a huge amount, but still, those kinds of things weigh into decisions like this. But we can certainly add WebP to Export for Web in the future, so we'll keep this in mind moving forward.
The fact that it's supported now is pretty great. I completely understand your reasoning for thinking why it wouldn't be needed for Export for Web... if you were basing the decision on traffic to your own site. Here are a couple of things to consider for adding it to Export for Web...:

- Pixelmator Pro customers that need WebP support are likely using it for sites where the percentage of traffic from Safari browsers are in the single digits (perhaps higher on mobile devices because of WebKit on iPhones and iPads).

- WebP is supposed to be the best format for reducing sizes while maintaining quality when compared to JPG and PNG. Including it with the Export for Web... feature will allow the core users that would utilize this feature to output WebP along with other formats and resolutions. They could then use the srcset attribute to deliver the best format to the brower.

I'm excited and appreciative to have this new feature in Pixelmator Pro. The only problem is that it's excluded from the main workflow that the majority of users who need this feature would use. That workflow is Export for Web... and the ability to optimize the WebP image.
User avatar

2020-06-04 18:24:09

by henshaw 2020-06-04 14:27:07
The fact that it's supported now is pretty great. I completely understand your reasoning for thinking why it wouldn't be needed for Export for Web... if you were basing the decision on traffic to your own site. Here are a couple of things to consider for adding it to Export for Web...:

- Pixelmator Pro customers that need WebP support are likely using it for sites where the percentage of traffic from Safari browsers are in the single digits (perhaps higher on mobile devices because of WebKit on iPhones and iPads).

- WebP is supposed to be the best format for reducing sizes while maintaining quality when compared to JPG and PNG. Including it with the Export for Web... feature will allow the core users that would utilize this feature to output WebP along with other formats and resolutions. They could then use the srcset attribute to deliver the best format to the brower.

I'm excited and appreciative to have this new feature in Pixelmator Pro. The only problem is that it's excluded from the main workflow that the majority of users who need this feature would use. That workflow is Export for Web... and the ability to optimize the WebP image.
If you want to implement it on some websites.

For me I use after export for web, Depends png, jepg or svg I use for my Wordpress site optimole. It converts it automatically to webp images. And serves it through a cdn and options it on the users device.

How do you implement it on your website?

Thanks
User avatar

2020-06-04 18:31:08

by ResLes 2020-06-04 06:00:00 How do you implement it on your website?
I either use srcset and have fallback images or I use Polish with Cloudflare. But I prefer to do it manually and not rely on a CDN when possible. Hence the need for Export for Web... integration.

Image
User avatar

2020-06-04 18:40:37

by henshaw 2020-06-04 00:00:00
I either use srcset and have fallback images or I use Polish with Cloudflare. But I prefer to do it manually and not rely on a CDN when possible. Hence the need for Export for Web... integration.

Image
Thanks for the code. Maybe I use it for the future.

Sorry I wasn’t so clear. I use the image optimisation plugin optimole with wp rocket webp caching. I think it’s a great plugin as it lets the optional as it is or optimise it further if i haven’t optimised it enough - balance between speed and quality. It serves only the images from a cdn or should I say 7 different locations (free) version.

It is interesting to do it manually but I can’t see what’s the advantages is other then not have an additional plugin. Which looks well coded.
Would you be explaining?
User avatar

2020-06-04 18:45:34

by ResLes 2020-06-04 06:00:00 It is interesting to do it manually but I can’t see what’s the advantages is other then not have an additional plugin. Which looks well coded.
Would you be explaining?
Because I'm not interested in offloading it to a plugin or adding an additional plugin to my WordPress installs.

In my experience, plugins convert images using the same settings and what they output isn't always optimal. I prefer to optimize images individually with varying degrees of quality. The Export for Web... feature is perfect for that.
User avatar

2020-06-04 18:57:27

by henshaw 2020-06-04 18:46:51
Because I'm not interested in offloading it to a plugin or adding an additional plugin to my WordPress installs.

In my experience, plugins convert images using the same settings and what they output isn't always optimal. I prefer to optimize images individually with varying degrees of quality. The Export for Web... feature is perfect for that.
That it is true. It is not always ideal and of course less plugins are better. I can see that. And it depends how you see things. For me it made an big improvement. For one it serves webp images, it uses the right image for the right screen size and it served the images though their image cdn although a normal or premium cdn made my website slower.

Depends on your setup, philosophy and views, fair enough.

I have also expected it would be on export for web, too. But happy Pixelmator did it to support it.
User avatar

2020-06-13 15:13:17

Pixelmator Pro 1.6.4 supports WebP view and exports

What I don't understand is why they haven't included it in the "Export for web".

Thank u!
User avatar

2020-06-13 15:20:25

by Eneko 2020-06-13 06:00:00 What I don't understand is why they haven't included it in the "Export for web".
I messaged a lead developer on Twitter and they said they would be adding it in one of their upcoming updates. I think they're well aware now that Export for Web... is essential for the majority of users that need WebP functionality in the app.

With that being said, I've already used the new support for WebP several times. It's nice to finally be able to have QuickLook and to open and edit WebP images I download.
User avatar

2020-06-23 10:49:47

There goes the last reason not to add WebP to Export for Web: https://www.macrumors.com/2020/06/22/webp-safari-14/

User avatar

2020-06-23 10:52:50

by Andrius 2020-06-23 10:51:17 There goes the last reason not to add WebP to Export for Web: https://www.macrumors.com/2020/06/22/webp-safari-14/

fantastic news. I was wondering when/if they would do that