Converters
PNG to JPG Converter
Convert PNG to JPG and shrink the file size — pick a quality level and a background color for any transparent areas, since JPG cannot keep them.
Convert images
Converting PNG to JPG by default — drop a PNG file below, or any JPG, PNG or WebP image; the format picker underneath lets you change the target.
Drop images here, or click to choose files
JPG, PNG or WebP · up to 25.0 MB each · 12 files at a time. Large or very high-resolution images are capped so a decode can't lock this tab.
Why a transparent PNG can't become a JPG without a decision being made
JPEG has no transparency channel built into the format at all — every single pixel a JPG stores has to be a solid, opaque colour, full stop. So when a PNG with see-through areas — a logo cut out of its background, an icon with rounded corners, a screenshot with a drop shadow rendered on transparency — gets converted to JPG, those see-through pixels have to be filled with something before the file can exist. There's no way around this decision; it isn't optional the way a quality setting is. The only choice you actually have is what colour fills those areas, and getting that choice wrong is the single most common complaint about this conversion: a logo that looked fine in an editor suddenly has a black or dark grey rectangle where the transparency used to be, because whatever tool did the conversion picked a default nobody saw coming.
Photographs are where PNG to JPG genuinely pays off
For an actual photograph — a picture taken with a camera, with no transparency and no hard edges between flat colours — converting from PNG to JPG is close to a pure win. Photographs are exactly the kind of image JPEG's lossy compression was designed around: continuous tone, lots of subtle colour variation, no crisp boundaries a viewer would immediately notice getting slightly soft. A PNG of a photo is often needlessly large because PNG's lossless approach can't exploit any of that, so converting to JPG at a reasonably high quality typically drops the file size to a fraction of the PNG's while looking effectively identical at normal viewing sizes. This is the direction to reach for whenever a photo somehow ended up saved as PNG and needs to go somewhere size actually matters, like an email attachment or a page that needs to load quickly.
Screenshots, line art and text: the images this conversion usually hurts
The opposite is true for anything with sharp, high-contrast edges — a screenshot with crisp text, a UI mockup, a technical diagram, or hand-drawn line art. JPEG's compression works by smoothing subtle transitions the eye won't miss, and a sharp black-on-white edge is exactly what it handles worst: converting a text-heavy screenshot to JPG tends to introduce a visible halo or fuzziness around every letter, sometimes at a barely-smaller file size than the PNG it came from, because there's so little redundancy for a lossy encoder to exploit in flat colour blocks and crisp lines. PNG's lossless compression is actually well suited to this kind of image — solid colour runs compress efficiently even without throwing anything away — so a screenshot or diagram converted to JPG is usually a worse trade in both directions.
Picking a background colour that won't surprise anyone later
Because the fill colour is a real decision rather than a technical detail, it's worth choosing deliberately rather than accepting whatever default shows up. White works well for anything that's ultimately going onto a white page or a light UI, which covers most logos and product cutouts. But a photo of a subject shot against a dark set, or an icon meant for a dark app theme, will look wrong with a white fill and right with a colour that actually matches the destination — match the picker to wherever the JPG is actually going to be placed, not to a generic default, and you avoid an awkward mismatched edge showing up once the image is dropped into its real context.
When the size saving from converting is barely noticeable
Not every PNG shrinks meaningfully by becoming a JPG. An icon or a simple logo with only a handful of flat colours and no photographic detail is often already close to its practical minimum size as a PNG, and forcing it through JPEG's lossy compression can introduce visible artefacting around its edges for a size reduction too small to justify the trade. As a rule of thumb: the more an image looks like a photograph — gradients, texture, lots of distinct colours — the more this conversion is worth doing; the more it looks like flat graphic design or text, the less there is to gain and the more there is to lose.
Questions
- Why does my screenshot look fuzzy after converting it from PNG to JPG?
- Because JPEG's compression is built to smooth over subtle colour transitions a viewer's eye won't notice in a photograph, and a screenshot is almost entirely made of the opposite — sharp, high-contrast edges between text and background, and flat blocks of a single colour. Feed that kind of image through a lossy encoder and the edges are exactly what softens first, showing up as a faint halo or blur around letters and icon outlines that was never there in the PNG. It's usually most visible zoomed in, but on small text it can be noticeable at normal size too. If a screenshot needs to shrink, a higher quality setting helps somewhat, but PNG generally stays the better format for this kind of image regardless — its lossless compression already handles flat colour efficiently without any of this trade-off.
- Is it worth converting a screenshot to JPG to save space?
- Usually not. Screenshots are mostly flat colour and sharp edges, which is exactly the content PNG's lossless compression already handles efficiently — there often isn't much size to gain by switching to a lossy format, and what you do gain tends to come with visible fuzziness around text and UI edges that a PNG never had. If a screenshot genuinely needs to be smaller, cropping out anything unnecessary before converting, or reaching for WebP instead of JPG, usually gets a better result — WebP's lossy mode handles flat colour more gracefully than JPEG's does. Keep PNG for anything you'll zoom into or read text from; save this conversion for actual photographs.
- What background colour should I pick if my PNG has transparent edges?
- Match it to wherever the resulting JPG is actually going to appear, not to a generic assumption. White is a safe default if the image is headed onto a plain white page, document, or light-themed interface, which covers most everyday cases. But if the destination is a dark background — a dark app theme, a black slide, a photo composited onto a dark scene — picking white will leave an obvious mismatched edge around the shape once it's placed. There's no single universally correct choice here, which is exactly why this is left as something you pick rather than something baked in silently.
- Why is my JPG barely smaller than the PNG I converted it from?
- This usually means the source PNG was closer to flat graphic design than photography — a logo, an icon, or an image with only a handful of distinct colours and no gradients or texture. PNG's lossless compression already handles that kind of content efficiently, so there's comparatively little redundancy left for JPEG's lossy encoder to exploit, and the size difference between the two versions can end up small even though JPG is generally the smaller format for photographs. If the size barely moves, it's a sign this particular image was a better fit for PNG (or WebP) than JPG to begin with, regardless of the file size result.