Burndog

Any updates on when we'll be able to export to WebP format???
This is essential for those of us doing SEO on websites as performance is a greater than ever metric for SEO.

Cool. Regardless, my point stands: this is a mainstream image format today (as others have pointed out, Google, Facebook and Twitter drive somewhere close to half the web and use it), and that ratio will only grow. 
Photoshop doesn't support it? Is the point of Affinity Photo to be as good as Photoshop, or better?
I don't understand the arguments against supporting WebP at all. Is it the work involved? It's not a lot of work, open source libs for WebP are commonplace. Are they secretly hoping that WebP will fail in favor of superior, patent-free formats? I've been waiting twenty years for that, good luck.

Basically I can write a picture tag as per:
<picture> <source srcset="img/image.webp" type="image/webp"> <source srcset="img/image.jp2" type="image/jp2"> <img src="img/image.png" alt="woof"> </picture> But also it's also just a matter of time until you upgrade. I would wager you're not going to be on Catalina in 2030, and I've been in this business long enough to care about the long game..

WebP is google backed and initially developed I believe. Google controls what we all do on the web if we are concerned about getting our websites seen.

Please add this export module to Designer and Photo as it is essential to anyone that is competitive in the Google SERP ranking environment (which should be anyone with a website).

WebP is google backed and initially developed I believe. Google controls what we all do on the web if we are concerned about getting our websites seen.

Please add this export module to Designer and Photo as it is essential to anyone that is competitive in the Google SERP ranking environment (which should be anyone with a website).

Any updates on when we'll be able to export to WebP format???
This is essential for those of us doing SEO on websites as performance is a greater than ever metric for SEO.

Yup, it prevents me from leaving InDesign and moving to all Affinity products.

Any updates on when we'll be able to export to WebP format???
This is essential for those of us doing SEO on websites as performance is a greater than ever metric for SEO.

Google uses website efficiency as a key benefit to ones SEO ranking. So yes, it matters.

And as noted, your websites success is based on it being found via search engines, or if not, the site effectively does not exist. We're talking business, not a website of your puppy that only your family knows of.
Google is the 1000 pound Gorilla and there is no denying that their edicts are factors we need to consider, whether one likes it or not.
 

Bottomline is that Google dictates what is expected and we all need to accept this. Why Google? Because of SEO. IF Google gives benefit to webp due to it's obvious efficiency and then uses this matrix in how they deliver their SERPs, there is no argument.

NO it's not... Get a life and stop wasting space on this thread as you have no clue or dog in this fight.

 

NO it's not... Get a life and stop wasting space on this thread as you have no clue or dog in this fight.

 

I hear you... But the droning on and on and on....  It's like a petulant child that keeps trying to make some point that they clearly have no clue about and this comes at the cost of everyone else's legitimate statements.

IF the comments were from seasoned SEO's then fine. But this is not the case and more clearly chaff, and for what point? Is there some other feature that needs to be incorporated at this moment?

Yes, I was rude. Sorry

I'm disputing that you, or your research has ANY helpful bearing in this conversation.

Not only does Google want to see webp as an image format, most of the WYSIWYG websites that many beginners use, are converting their uploads to webp. Both Google and these cheesy website creation services are enough weight to show that this is NOT some minor or esoteric request.

Again, I don't mean to be rude but please stop wasting space on something you clearly have no real world understanding or experience with.

I hear you... But the droning on and on and on....  It's like a petulant child that keeps trying to make some point that they clearly have no clue about and this comes at the cost of everyone else's legitimate statements.

IF the comments were from seasoned SEO's then fine. But this is not the case and more clearly chaff, and for what point? Is there some other feature that needs to be incorporated at this moment?

Yes, I was rude. Sorry

NO it's not... Get a life and stop wasting space on this thread as you have no clue or dog in this fight.

 

The problem is that you always have something to say, but no real arguments based on facts! Maybe it's time to not lurk around this forum all day and take a nice walk outside!
I know what I'm talking about and you proved to me that you  don't. If you don't want webp in Affinity fine! Some other people would be delighted when it was implemented in the export panel. I work with webp every day!

Hi @R C-R & @carl123
https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2019/10/speed-up-your-website-webp/
Beter do your homework before making assumptions that are not true.
Web design and SEO are an important part of my profession!
https://moz.com/learn/seo/page-speed
Regards,
David

I changed a website from jpeg to webp. Page Speed Insights elevated the result from 91/89 before to 99/100 (desktop/mobile) after. 
Because all other parameters kept the same I'd say it has a appreciable effect on Google's SEO ranking.
Testing a single picture is nonsense, because there are too many additional aspects involved - especially if it is done locally with the browser tools. Even a slight fluctuation of the connection is enough to get a completely distorted result. If you will achieve reasonable results with this method, then please repeat it 100 times, always clear the cache before and take the mean of that and – highly relevant – do it with the same browser.
But even then it has no real meaning to the average speed of a website. In my experience webp does impact this positively. In particular, this reduces the amount of data, which is a relevant cost factor for mobile devices and an advantage for slow networks/connections.

To be honest, webp for me primarily is relevant because of SEO and website use. This is the reason why I miss it in Photo.
It is a matter of respect and consideration for my website visitors that I keep their data volume as small as possible, especially if they want to visit my pages with their mobile phone.
webp offers the possibility to save a lot of bandwidth with comparable presentation to jpeg or png. So a modern pixel graphics tool should support this format. 
Nobody here demands that other formats should be abandoned or replaced with it. It is only a matter of offering webp additionally, so that photo as a tool remains interesting for web workers.

Why are people that clearly have no idea of what webp is for commenting so much?
I don't mean to be rude but why are people clogging this thread with their uniformed comments that don't relate to the purpose of WebP and how it effects SEO and website use?

Google uses website efficiency as a key benefit to ones SEO ranking. So yes, it matters.

And as noted, your websites success is based on it being found via search engines, or if not, the site effectively does not exist. We're talking business, not a website of your puppy that only your family knows of.
Google is the 1000 pound Gorilla and there is no denying that their edicts are factors we need to consider, whether one likes it or not.
 

Why are people that clearly have no idea of what webp is for commenting so much?
I don't mean to be rude but why are people clogging this thread with their uniformed comments that don't relate to the purpose of WebP and how it effects SEO and website use?

Why are people that clearly have no idea of what webp is for commenting so much?
I don't mean to be rude but why are people clogging this thread with their uniformed comments that don't relate to the purpose of WebP and how it effects SEO and website use?

Why are people that clearly have no idea of what webp is for commenting so much?
I don't mean to be rude but why are people clogging this thread with their uniformed comments that don't relate to the purpose of WebP and how it effects SEO and website use?