Tinypng

TinyPNG is excellent for quick, one-off compressions. I upload a PNG, it shrinks to a fraction of the size — often 70% smaller — with no visible quality loss for most photographs. I've used it for years. It's simple: drag and drop, download. No sign-up required for the free tier. The compression is lossy but smart: it reduces colour depth and removes redundant metadata. I've found it particularly effective for screenshots and interface images that don't need full 24-bit colour. For a 2MB PNG, I typically get down to 400KB. That's a big win for page load times. The service also supports JPEG and WebP now, so you can use one tool for multiple formats. I've integrated it into my workflow via the WordPress plugin, which auto-compresses images on upload. That saves me a step. The API is reliable for automated tasks, though I'll talk about the cost later. I used to assume TinyPNG's compression was always lossless, but it's not. I learned that the hard way when a client's high-res product images lost detail in gradients. Now I only use it for web-optimised images, not for print. Overall, for the occasional compressor, it's hard to beat.

TinyPNG is awkward for batch processing on the free tier. You can only compress 20 images at a time, each up to 5MB. That's fine for a few images, but for a site redesign with hundreds of product photos, it's tedious. The API is the answer, but it costs — 500 compressions per month free, then $0.002 per image after that. That adds up if you're doing thousands. I've switched to local tools like ImageOptim or Squoosh CLI for large batches. Another awkward point: the compression is always lossy. There's no option for lossless reduction. If you need to preserve exact pixel data, TinyPNG is not the tool. Also, the interface is basic — no batch rename, no format conversion beyond the supported ones. I've also found that small images (under 100KB) see minimal savings, so it's not worth the bandwidth. The lack of control over quality settings is another frustration. You get what you get. For projects where I need to fine-tune compression per image, I use something else. And the WebP compression is good, but not as good as dedicated WebP encoders. I've had cases where TinyPNG's WebP output was larger than the original PNG. That's a trap. I got tripped up by the 5MB limit once — I had a 10MB PNG and had to split it into tiles. That was a waste of time. If you need to audit oversized images across a site, I recommend using [Screaming Frog](/screaming-frog/) to find them first.

For most SEO work, I now use Squoosh (Google's open-source tool) for more control. It lets me adjust quality, compression method, and output format. It's free, offline, and handles batch processing if you use the CLI. For lossless compression, I use ImageOptim on Mac or PNGGauntlet on Windows. These are lossless and can reduce file size without quality loss. For CMS integration, I use the ShortPixel plugin over TinyPNG because it offers both lossy and lossless options, and handles PDFs too. For large-scale workflows, I've built a script using the ImageMagick toolset. That gives me full control. On the free side, I also keep Screaming Frog in my toolkit — it audits image sizes and can flag oversized images. Then I run them through Squoosh. I also use [Website Speed Test](/website-speed-test/) to measure the impact of compression on load times. And [Surfer SEO](/surferseo/) helps me optimise content around images. For user behaviour after speed improvements, I check [Hotjar](/hotjar/) for session recordings. I also keep [SEO Tools](/seo-tools/) bookmarked for a broader view. But for a simple, no-fuss compression, TinyPNG is still my first choice. I've just learned to know its limits. I used to think TinyPNG was the only tool I needed, but I've changed my mind after dealing with batch processing. Now I use a combination of tools depending on the task.