I don't get the point of complaining about losing such small details that non-educated eye can't see for a compression format.
That's the whole point of compressing the image, isn't it?
To me, it looks like webp does its job.
That's the whole point of compressing the image, isn't it?
To me, it looks like webp does its job.
> Stick to JPEG at 90 quality (or at least 85) if images matter to you, e.g. if you are a visual artist. If images are pretty decorations for your textual content, it doesn’t matter.