Using WebP Image Alongside Existing Images

[GrouchyKids]

Is it worthwhile to add in WebP images alongside existing images?

WebP Images can be three times smaller than PNGs and 25% smaller than JPGs, according to a plugin option I am looking at.

The alternative WebP images are provided via CDN.

Does anyone have any experience with this, and is it worth doing?

[effectdigital]

Yeah I'd say it is worthwhile. WebP images can look great at a fraction of the file-size of the equivalent PNG / JPG / JPEG files

I don't know about having a CDN specifically to supply WebP images. Are your normal images (currently) supplied via a CDN? If they are not, why would you complicate things? You can serve the WebP images from your own site with fall-backs to PNG / JPG images as required

If your current images are served via CDN, then maybe serving the WebP images via CDN is a good idea. Just try not to change too many things at once, always take the simplest and most elegant solution

[GrouchyKids]

Thanks effectdigital,

Other site images are not via CDN.

Its an option provided by a plugin we use Shortpixel. 

I believe the  WebP images would be supplied via their CDN.

But perhaps this does just complicate things, I guess I could always try it and test via Pingdom although it does mean recompensing all existing images.

[effectdigital]

If other images are not via CDN, then you can probably also deploy WebP images without the CDN. I would convert your on-site images to WebP and recode your site / theme to serve your WebP images instead, and then code in some fall-backs for browsers which still don't support WebP. What I'm not seeing, is why a CDN is fundamentally required. Adding more unnecessary calls and connections to your pages can slow it down. For large sites with huge traffic-loads, CDNs are perfectly appropriate. With some smaller sites, I have seen CDNs implemented which actually make the pages take longer to load (a CDN isn't always needed). Myself I'd experiment on a couple of pages, replacing all their embedded images with WebP versions and see what difference it makes. If it met with success, I'd then roll the change out across the site (with in-code fall-backs for older or disruptive browsers). But I don't think I'd adopt a CDN at the same time I was trialing WebP, I'd keep it separate (for now). Then I'd try a CDN after and see if that resulted in further uplift or not!

[GrouchyKids]

Thanks for your help will do as you suggest.