Martijn S. said: @keith agreed, am keeping a regular eye on the growth of the used storage under 'My Account' and the amount of charged storage can only be based on the original size of the image. @aisforanagrams using jpeg's for opaque images is the Roll20 best practice ( <a href="https://roll20.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360037256634-Best-Practices-for-Files-on-Roll20#images-and-animations-0-2" rel="nofollow">https://roll20.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360037256634-Best-Practices-for-Files-on-Roll20#images-and-animations-0-2</a> ). If i would stop using jpeg and only use png's, that would imply a max tile/map size of 20x20 grids. - based on a pro-account 10 MB maximum asset size. - based on 140 pixels per grid - which is within the 70-150 DPI range as deemed adequate by roll20. Last Tuesday night it took my players with laptops and not-all-to-good wifi many minutes for the map to load. If you're comparing high quality jpg to png, you're going to get good mileage out of jpg if dealing with noisy, low contrast images (like photographs), however, for images with sharp boundaries and areas of solid colors, (like illustrations/solid color text) png is the way to go - it's where png's compression shines and you're not going to gain much from jpg in terms of file size (unless you're quality setting is low) while having noticeably worse quality.