fp.

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.

Comments

Evidlo•1mo ago

Some 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/

xeonmc•1mo ago

Also, the aesthetic design is too "professional" and therefore not trustworthy.

A trustworthy utility page should look like a CSS-less crappy HTML form.

breve•1mo 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/

GIMP is another: https://www.gimp.org/

Krita is another: https://krita.org/en/

xeonmc•1mo ago

People don't want to install/download/vet reputation of local apps for spontaneous, one-off tasks.

breve•1mo ago

But 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•1mo ago

You 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.

baobun•1mo ago

50/50 you have either ImageMagick or ffmpeg installed already.

pwdisswordfishy•1mo ago

Although I can't speak for everyone, my browser runs locally.

zipping1549•1mo ago

Why use GUI at all? ffmpeg does it one-liner, a very long one.

RealStickman_•1mo ago

Imagemagick also does it in the terminal. Chances are about as good as ffmpeg that you have it installed already

DaleCurtis•1mo ago

FWIW, 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•1mo ago

That would require a browser that supports WebP

theandrewbailey•1mo ago

...which is, like, all of them released over the past 5 years: https://caniuse.com/webp

valadaptive•1mo ago

Firefox now adds random noise to all canvas readback operations (getImageData, toDataURL, and toBlob).

DaleCurtis•1mo ago

Ah, 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.

fouc•1mo ago

Does this work on a browser that doesn't support WebP? That would be useful.

Yash16•1mo ago

Do you support integrations or provide open-source APIs? I want to integrate this with https://picxstudio.com and enable easy, browser-based downloads in multiple image formats.

gethly•1mo ago

You can compile VIPS or similar library into WASM and avoid doing much work yourself.

alexpham14•1mo ago

I appreciate the meticulousness of the website.