The short version
Both tools shrink JPEG and PNG files using smart compression. The difference is where it happens: TinyPNG sends your image to its servers, processes it there, and sends it back. Lumiveil does all the work locally on your device. Your file never leaves your browser.
That makes Lumiveil faster to start (no upload time), better for sensitive images (screenshots, IDs, client work), and free of the per-image limits that gate most online compressors.
Feature comparison
| Feature | Lumiveil | TinyPNG |
|---|---|---|
| Uploads your images | Never | Yes, to its servers |
| Works offline | Yes (after load) | No |
| Account required | No | No |
| Free image limit | Unlimited | 20 / batch on web |
| WebP support | Yes (in & out) | Yes |
| Resize & convert | Yes | No (compress only) |
| Rotate, filters, watermark | Yes | No |
| Background removal | Yes (plain BG) | No |
| Privacy model | 100% local | Server-side |
When to pick which
✅ Choose Lumiveil if…
- You care about privacy — client work, IDs, screenshots, medical or financial images.
- You want one tool that also resizes, converts and removes backgrounds, not just compression.
- You batch-compress often and hit TinyPNG's 20-image web limit.
- You want zero upload time on slow connections.
🟡 TinyPNG still wins if…
- You need its specific multi-pass optimisation on tricky PNGs.
- You already pay for the developer API at scale.
Is Lumiveil actually free?
Yes — all seven tools are free and unlimited, forever. A Lumiveil Pro tier (batch zip downloads, advanced controls, no ads) covers costs, but the core tools never move behind a paywall.
Frequently asked questions
If nothing is uploaded, how does compression work?
Modern browsers can decode, recompress and re-encode images locally using the Canvas API and the browser's built-in image codecs. Lumiveil uses those APIs — the same ones your browser uses to display images — to do the work on your device.
Will the quality be as good as TinyPNG?
For JPEG and WebP, Lumiveil gives you a quality slider so you choose the size/quality trade-off. For most web and social use, output is visually indistinguishable at a fraction of the file size.