Will image quality improve if I convert to PNG?

No. PNG is a lossless format, but that does not mean it brings back detail that has been lost; it only means it adds no new loss of its own. If your AVIF file was saved in lossy mode, the compression traces inside it have already become part of the image, and PNG stores them faithfully, exactly as they are. In other words, PNG does not give you a clean image, it gives you a frozen, non-degrading copy of the current image. Do not choose PNG expecting a quality improvement.

Why is the PNG file so much bigger than the AVIF?

Because the two work with completely different compression philosophies. AVIF shrinks by discarding information the human eye does not notice; PNG discards nothing and merely packs repeating patterns losslessly. Photographs contain almost no repeating patterns, so PNG's compression gains are very limited. That is why a photographic AVIF converted to PNG grows several times over — this is entirely normal and not a sign of anything going wrong.

When should I definitely choose JPG?

If the image is photographic, contains no transparent areas, and you need to send, upload or share the file, JPG is the right choice. In practice JPG opens on every device, in every program and on every platform; no modern format comes close on that front. The file size also stays reasonable, which matters for email attachments and web use. Remember to keep the quality setting high, because you are going from lossy to lossy.

Does it make sense to produce both?

In some cases, yes. You might need a transparent PNG version of a logo for use on both dark and light backgrounds, plus a small JPG version to drop into emails and documents. It is important to make both conversions from the same original AVIF; chained conversions such as producing a PNG from a JPG accumulate unnecessary loss. As long as you keep the original, you can generate as many different outputs as you like.

AVIF to JPG or PNG? Which One Should You Convert To?

Two different problems, two different solutions

Your AVIF file will not open and you need to convert it. There are two sensible targets in front of you: JPG and PNG. The answers you find online usually proceed from incomplete logic along the lines of "PNG is lossless, so it is better."

In reality these two formats solve different problems. The right choice depends on what you plan to do with the file after conversion. In this article we tie the decision to concrete criteria.

First, three technical facts

There are three points to clear up before deciding.

First: your AVIF is probably lossy. AVIF supports both lossy and lossless modes, but almost every AVIF file you encounter on the web was produced in lossy mode — that is the format's whole reason for existing. So some detail in the image you hold has already been discarded.

Second: no conversion brings loss back. Neither JPG nor PNG. This is not a software limitation but a simple consequence of information theory; discarded data is not in the file.

Third: JPG adds a second round of loss, PNG does not. Because JPG is lossy, re-encoding produces new artefacts. PNG is lossless; it stores the pixels decoded from the AVIF exactly as they are — existing artefacts included.

When is JPG the right choice?

Choose JPG in these situations:

The content is photographic. Landscapes, portraits, product shots, food photography. JPG was designed for this kind of content and does a good job with smooth gradients.

There is no transparency. If the image contains no transparent areas, JPG's biggest shortcoming does not concern you.

You are going to share or upload the file. An email attachment, an application form, a classifieds site, a messaging app. JPG is accepted in all of these environments.

File size matters. The sizes PNG produces for photographs cause problems for email and web use; JPG stays under control.

With one condition: when you do the conversion, keep the quality setting high. Because the source is already compressed, low quality values stack two layers of artefacts on top of each other and the result is visibly dirty.

When is PNG the right choice?

Choose PNG in these situations:

There is transparency. This alone is decisive. A logo without a background, a cut-out product image, a semi-transparent shadow — JPG can preserve none of these and fills transparent areas with a solid colour. PNG preserves them.

You are going to edit the image. If you will be cropping, colour-correcting, adding text and saving the file several times, PNG makes sense. No new generation of compression is added on each save, so degradation does not accumulate.

The content has sharp edges. Screenshots, interface imagery, drawings, diagrams, text-heavy graphics. JPG produces ringing around letters and line edges in this kind of content; PNG does not.

You need to move the image to another system losslessly. Some workflows require the intermediate format to be lossless.

PNG's price is size. When you convert a photographic AVIF to PNG, expect the file to grow several times over. This is normal; PNG discards nothing, and there is very little for lossless compression to gain on photographs.

Quick decision table

If the decision has to be reduced to single lines:

Photo + sharing + no transparency → JPG
Transparent areas present → PNG, no argument
Screenshot, drawing, graphic containing text → PNG
You will edit and save several times → PNG
Email, message, form upload, size critical → JPG
You do not know the recipient's device → JPG

The grey area where people hesitate is usually this: an image with no transparency that nevertheless contains text — a promotional banner with copy on it, for example. If legibility of the text is your priority, PNG; if file size is your priority, a high-quality JPG makes sense. Producing both and looking at them side by side takes a few seconds and settles the question.

Three common mistakes

"PNG is lossless, so the quality will be better." Wrong. PNG preserves existing quality, it does not increase it. A lossless copy of a degraded image is still degraded.

Chained conversion. Producing a JPG from the AVIF, then a PNG from the JPG. Every lossy step leaves permanent damage. Always go directly from the original AVIF to your target.

Deleting the original. AVIF is usually smaller than both of them, and if you need another format in the future it is your cleanest source. The cost of keeping it is practically zero.

In summary

This is not a question of "which format is better" but a question of intended use. If there is transparency or the content has sharp edges, choose PNG and accept the large file. If you are sharing photographic content, choose JPG and keep the quality setting high to minimise second-generation loss. In both cases, keep the original AVIF; if you need to change your mind, it is your only clean starting point.