Skip to main content
Inspiring
January 12, 2017
In Development

P: Camera Raw/Lightroom Classic/Lightroom Ecosystem: Support for WebP

  • January 12, 2017
  • 72 replies
  • 17007 views

I'm preparing a bunch of files for the web and would like to use Google's WebP format. How can I export photos in Lightroom to WebP?

72 replies

johnrellis
Legend
April 14, 2025

@Nite-Stian: "I really miss the options to export as PNG and WEBP directly from Lr."

 

LR Classic Export does support PNG, though not WebP.

 

"I want to easily be able to batch export from the app I am working in."

 

See here for how to do batch exports from LR to WebP:

https://community.adobe.com/t5/camera-raw-ideas/p-camera-raw-lightroom-classic-lightroom-ecosystem-support-for-webp/idc-p/13119120/page/2#M16042

 

Having it built-in to LR would make the exports go faster, of course.

GermanKiwi
Participating Frequently
April 9, 2025

Google isn't penalising sites simply for having JPGs - rather, Google recommends sites *also* use webp images too.

 

Other formats like AVIF, JPEG-XL, or HEIC don't have nearly the same level of browser support that webp has. Literally every major browser supports webp, which is not the case for those other formats: https://caniuse.com/webp

Legend
April 7, 2025

There are BILLIONS of websites with jpeg files and that's not going to change anytime soon. You also might get better results with AVIF, JPEG-XL, or HEIC files compared to webp.

Having said that, it would be nice to have full, built-in support for all of these formats in all Adobe products. This would be much more useful to a broad range of customers than more AI features, for example.

johnrellis
Legend
March 17, 2025

[This post contains formatting and embedded images that don't appear in email. View the post in your Web browser.]

 

@Valokammi: "there's  no upvote for start post."

 

See here:

 

Known Participant
March 17, 2025

Please put working link to post in ideas.
Edit: Found it, but there's  no upvote for start post.

Participant
February 26, 2025

Adobe has added Open and Save as .webp to Photoshop without needing third party plugins.  Now it's time to add the same to Lightroom Classic without third party plugins.

johnrellis
Legend
February 7, 2025

@GermanKiwi: "The only issue with using a third-party solution like XnConvert is that it involves compressing the image twice: firstly as a jpg and again as a webp. Unless you're able to export it as a tiff instead of a jpg."

 

Indeed, Xnconvert, Imagemagick, and Google's "cwebp" all will convert from PNG and TIFF to Webp, and all three could be used in LR Export's post-process actions.

GermanKiwi
Participating Frequently
February 7, 2025

The only issue with using a third-party solution like XnConvert is that it involves compressing the image twice: firstly as a jpg and again as a webp. Unless you're able to export it as a tiff instead of a jpg.

 

That's why we need a native solution directly in Lightroom, as already exists in Photoshop.

Rob_Cullen
Community Expert
Community Expert
February 7, 2025

If  you see my post of 5/1/2025 above I suggested XnConvert (free app). Use it like a plugin as a Post Processing set in Export.

I can create WEBP images from Lr-Classic with FOUR mouse clicks!

I first set up XnConvert to 'Output' WEBP files. (It can delete, or not, any JPGs that the Export has created, and auto-close XnConvert after the conversion.)

Set up an Export preset to send the files to XnConvert in the Post Processing panel.

So the method then becomes-

1) Select photos in LrC library

2) Export button (one click)

3) Choose the WebP Export Preset (one click)

4) [Export] (one click)

5) In XnConvert that opens [Convert]  (one click) , done.

 

Although, yes, an export preset for WebP would be handy.

Regards. My System: Windows-11, Lightroom-Classic 15.1.1, Photoshop 27.3.1, ACR 18.1.1, Lightroom 9.0, Lr-iOS 10.4.0, Bridge 16.0.2 .
Participant
February 6, 2025

I want to add a vote to including a WebP export option from Lightroom Classic. I have a publisher who wants WebP files. It seems like something that should have been included a while ago.