Convert BMP to PNG
A BMP stores every pixel at full size with no compression whatsoever, which is why a modest screenshot can be twenty megabytes. PNG stores exactly the same pixels and compresses them. This conversion is unusual in having no downside worth discussing: the image is identical and the file is a fraction of the size.
Use this without the search next time. Prathom Workbench puts Prathom's tools in your toolbar.
Add to Chrome — freeDrop your BMP file here, or click to browse
Up to 50 MB. Deleted automatically after 30 minutes.
What it does
- No account, deleted within 30 minutes
- Lossless, so the pixels are unchanged
- Typically 80-95% smaller
- Batch conversion with a ZIP download
How to use BMP to PNG
- 1
Add the BMP files
Screenshots from older Windows tools, exports from scientific instruments, scanner output, or anything with a .bmp extension. Batches are fine, and they come back as a ZIP.
- 2
Convert
The BMP is decoded and re-encoded as PNG. Expect the upload to dominate the time on a large one: BMP is uncompressed, so a 36 MB file is common where the PNG will be a couple of megabytes.
- 3
Download and delete the original
Unlike most conversions on this site, there is no reason to keep the source once you have checked the result. The PNG holds identical pixel data, so the BMP is a strictly larger copy of the same image.
How it works
The browser decodes the BMP, draws it to a canvas, and encodes the result as PNG, on our server.
The size difference is the whole point of the conversion. BMP files are large enough that the upload dominates the time — a 36 MB bitmap takes considerably longer to send over a typical connection than a browser takes to re-encode it. This is one of the cases where the local route is simply faster.
Why the saving is so large
BMP stores pixels and nothing else. Three bytes per pixel for 24-bit color, laid out row by row, with no attempt to notice that a thousand adjacent pixels are the same shade of gray. The size of the file is determined entirely by its dimensions.
PNG runs the same pixel data through Deflate, preceded by a filtering step that predicts each pixel from its neighbors and stores only the difference. On an interface screenshot, where huge runs of pixels really are identical, those differences are nearly all zero and compress to almost nothing. Hence the twentyfold reduction in the first example.
On a photograph the prediction rarely succeeds — adjacent pixels differ slightly almost everywhere — so the saving falls to roughly half. That is the whole story of lossless compression: it exploits repetition, and photographs have little.
Where BMP files still come from
The format is largely obsolete on the web but persists in a few places, which is why people still need this conversion.
Older Windows software. Paint saved BMP by default for years, and some in-house tools still do.
Scientific and industrial instruments. Microscope cameras, measurement devices and machine-vision systems often write BMP because it is trivial to implement and needs no library.
Scanners. Some drivers still offer it as the "no quality loss" option, which is true and also true of PNG at a fraction of the size.
Embedded systems. Anything that reads image data directly into a framebuffer benefits from a format with no decoding step, which is exactly what BMP was for.
In all four cases the reason is that BMP is simple to write, not that it is a good way to store a finished image. Converting is nearly always the right move once the file leaves the device that produced it.
Examples
A full-screen screenshot
Twenty times smaller, pixel for pixel identical. Screenshots are the best case because interfaces are full of flat color, which PNG's compression collapses almost completely and BMP does not compress at all.
A photograph saved as BMP
Still halved, but nothing like the screenshot's reduction. Photographs have almost no repeated adjacent pixels, so lossless compression has little to work with. A photograph that needs to be small should be JPEG or AVIF; PNG is the right answer only when it must stay lossless.
Frequently asked questions
Does converting lose any quality?
None at all. Both formats store exact pixel values, so the PNG is a bit-for-bit reproduction of the image the BMP contained. This is one of the few conversions where there is genuinely nothing to weigh up — the output is the same image in a smaller file, and no setting on this page changes that.
Why is a BMP so large in the first place?
Because it applies no compression. A 24-bit BMP stores three bytes for every single pixel, so a 1920x1080 image is always about 6 MB regardless of what it shows — a solid white rectangle takes exactly as much space as a photograph. The format was designed in the 1980s for direct display from memory, where that predictability was worth more than size.
Is anything lost besides the file size?
Almost nothing. BMP carries no metadata worth preserving: no EXIF, no color profile in ordinary files, no layers. The one edge case is that some BMP variants store a color palette rather than direct color, and the PNG reproduces those colors exactly rather than keeping them as an indexed palette. The image looks identical either way.
Should I use PNG or JPEG for the output?
PNG when the image is a screenshot, diagram, or anything with flat color and sharp edges — it stays lossless and compresses those extremely well. JPEG only when the BMP holds a photograph and the file needs to be much smaller than lossless compression can manage, accepting some quality loss in exchange.
Further reading
- The Same Image Was 10 KB as PNG and 7.6 MB as BMPBMP files are famous for being large, and the scale of it still surprises people when they see it directly. The same image, unchanged, was seven hundred and twenty-two times bigger in BMP than in PNG. The reason is simple and worth understanding, because it explains what every other format is doing for you.
- Cutting a Graphic to Sixteen Colors Saved Fourteen Per CentReducing the palette is standard advice for shrinking a PNG, and on a graphic that is already flat color it buys far less than the drastic-sounding change suggests. The reason is that PNG was already exploiting the same redundancy, and it had got there first.
- Mono at 16 kHz Was a Fifth of Stereo, and at a Fixed Bitrate Nothing ChangedMaking a recording mono is the standard advice for shrinking speech audio, and whether it works depends entirely on a setting most people never touch. Set one way it saves eighty per cent; set the other way it saves nothing at all and quietly improves the quality instead.