Sorry, is this comment meant in jest? If not, could you explain what exactly you mean by “no need for a converter?”
I’m pretty sure that’s not how it works. No actual file data conversion is happening when you do that unless you’re using additional tools e.g. browser extensions.
Hey, thanks for the input. I’d like to read more about this, but I can’t seem to find anything related online. Anything else you could share?
Just checking, you sure you’re not confusing fallback-to-another-format when the browser doesn’t support webp? Because that’s a bit of separate issue, and not a terribly relevant one since all major browsers have supported webp for a while now.
I think I know what you’re talking about, and I think you might have misunderstood a few things. I’ll explain my point and I’d appreciate it if you could confirm later whether it helped, or if I’m the one who misunderstood you.
“Saving as…” is, usually, just for setting the name of the file. The full filename, extension included. The extension is just another part of the name. It doesn’t define what rules the file’s contents actually follow. They’re for other purposes, such as helping your operating system know which software to use when opening each file. For example:
User double clicks a .pdf
System: Oh, I should try opening this in Adobe Acrobat.
But that doesn’t mean the file is actually a PDF. You can change the extension of any file, and it won’t automatically be converted to that extension (unless a specific feature has been added to make that implicit conversion). You could give an executable a .pdf extension and your system might then try opening it in Acrobat. Of course, it won’t work—there’s no way the system could have automatically made that conversion for you.
So you might wonder, why does your (fake) PNG—which is really just a webp with an incorrect extension—still work just fine? You can open it, view it, send it. What’s the trick?
Thing is, the software that actually deals with those files doesn’t even need to care about the extension, it’s a lot smarter than that. These programs will use things like magic bytes to figure out what the file they’re handling really is and deal with it appropriately.
So in this scenario, the user could save a webp file as PNG.
funny cat.png (still a webp!)
Then they might double click to open it.
System: How do I open a .png again?
.webp -> try the image viewer
.jpeg -> try the image viewer
.png -> try the image viewer (there it is)
And finally, the image viewer would correctly identify it as a webp image and display it normally.
The user might then assume that, since everything works as expected, they properly converted their webp to a PNG. In reality, it’s all thanks to these programs, built upon decades of helping users just make things work. Same with Discord, Paint.NET, etc. Any decent software will handle files it’s meant to handle, even if they aren’t properly labeled.
If you were to check the file contents though, using a tool like file, czkawka to find incorrect extensions, or even just checking image properties, it should still be identified as a webp.
I didn’t try it myself as you said because, to my understanding of files and software, doing so made no sense. But again, do tell if I got something wrong or misunderstood your comment.
Sorry, is this comment meant in jest? If not, could you explain what exactly you mean by “no need for a converter?”
I’m pretty sure that’s not how it works. No actual file data conversion is happening when you do that unless you’re using additional tools e.g. browser extensions.
Iirc .webp supports a fallback to PNG compression, so this actually works with some.webp files. I could be completely wrong tho.
Hey, thanks for the input. I’d like to read more about this, but I can’t seem to find anything related online. Anything else you could share?
Just checking, you sure you’re not confusing fallback-to-another-format when the browser doesn’t support webp? Because that’s a bit of separate issue, and not a terribly relevant one since all major browsers have supported webp for a while now.
You could’ve tried it yourself in the time it took you to craft this reply.
It has nothing to do with the browser. Change extension or just save originally as .png instead of .webp
Can pop the file right open in any image editor that can fart with pngs, post directly anywhere else, like Discord.
God I hate it when people have no social skills and talk like this.
How the f— do you know the circumstances of the person you’re talking to? Maybe they don’t have a computer at hand.
Don’t you realize how snotty and bratty and annoying this sounds, regardless?
Bah.
I think I know what you’re talking about, and I think you might have misunderstood a few things. I’ll explain my point and I’d appreciate it if you could confirm later whether it helped, or if I’m the one who misunderstood you.
“Saving as…” is, usually, just for setting the name of the file. The full filename, extension included. The extension is just another part of the name. It doesn’t define what rules the file’s contents actually follow. They’re for other purposes, such as helping your operating system know which software to use when opening each file. For example:
But that doesn’t mean the file is actually a PDF. You can change the extension of any file, and it won’t automatically be converted to that extension (unless a specific feature has been added to make that implicit conversion). You could give an executable a
.pdfextension and your system might then try opening it in Acrobat. Of course, it won’t work—there’s no way the system could have automatically made that conversion for you.So you might wonder, why does your (fake) PNG—which is really just a webp with an incorrect extension—still work just fine? You can open it, view it, send it. What’s the trick?
Thing is, the software that actually deals with those files doesn’t even need to care about the extension, it’s a lot smarter than that. These programs will use things like magic bytes to figure out what the file they’re handling really is and deal with it appropriately.
So in this scenario, the user could save a webp file as PNG.
Then they might double click to open it.
And finally, the image viewer would correctly identify it as a webp image and display it normally.
The user might then assume that, since everything works as expected, they properly converted their webp to a PNG. In reality, it’s all thanks to these programs, built upon decades of helping users just make things work. Same with Discord, Paint.NET, etc. Any decent software will handle files it’s meant to handle, even if they aren’t properly labeled.
If you were to check the file contents though, using a tool like
file,czkawkato find incorrect extensions, or even just checking image properties, it should still be identified as a webp.I didn’t try it myself as you said because, to my understanding of files and software, doing so made no sense. But again, do tell if I got something wrong or misunderstood your comment.
deleted by creator