Skip to main content
Participating Frequently
October 19, 2017
Answered

Adobe output module for Bridge CC 2018?

  • October 19, 2017
  • 32 replies
  • 19241 views

I have been using the Adobe output module within Bridge as part of my workflow, for easily creating web galleries of images for clients. With this latest update to Bridge CC 2018 it isn't there anymore.

How can I get this back or is there an alternative way to easily create web galleries of images in the photo suite?

I realise that LIghtroom is able to do this but it doesn't fit in my workflow and I rarely use it. I shot & output my images in Phocus, batch process into various formats in photoshop and then create web galleries via Bridge.

This topic has been closed for replies.
Correct answer Junebug Clark

Mark.... Here is what I found digging thru Support Files:

Note:

Beginning with the October 2017 release of Bridge CC, the following updates have been made:

  • A new Output workspace has been introduced to generate PDF contact sheet natively in Bridge. For help documentation, see Create a PDF contact sheet in Output workspace.
  • The Adobe Output Module (AOM) plug-in (explained in this article) is no longer supported and the functionality to create web galleries has been discontinued in the latest version of Bridge.
  • The Adobe Output Module (AOM) plug-in works only with Bridge CC November, 2016 (version 7.0) and earlier releases. You can download the appropriate AOM file using the links provided in this article.

32 replies

Participating Frequently
January 27, 2018

I noticed that they have just added the PDF output back into CC 2018 in the latest update. Hopefully, that is a sign that they will reintroduce an ability to generate and upload HTML web galleries soon.

I would also like it if someone could show us how to get the old web galleries working in Brdige CC 2108. For now, I will stick using CC 2107 as I use the gallery generation every day.

Participant
January 16, 2018

Yep, me too, need html web gallery back. It's simple and gets uploaded to my OWN web space for every job. This keeps it consistent with the last 15 years of jobs. I have to close Bridge CC2018 and open Bridge CS6 after I've finished photoshopping files just to export a web gallery....................

jamesf74297358
Participant
January 17, 2018

Seriously Adobe. Listen to the professionals who require his feature. I work for an agency where we process tens of thousands of images and can not use your cloud feature due to client confidentiality constraints.

Participant
January 19, 2018

YES.

Studio Pothoff
Participant
January 8, 2018

ADOBE ....

PLEASE BRING BACK THE OUTPUT WEB GALLERY MODULE FOR BRIDGE !!!!!

Participant
December 13, 2017

Just wanted to add another voice to the debate.

Another professional who appreciated the time saving power of the wonderful web gallery output function in Bridge.I have tried Adobe Portfolio, but it is much more time consuming and fiddly.
Please bing back the web gallery output function Adobe.

Known Participant
November 29, 2017

I agree with everyone else here, bring back the webgallery output. Removing this was a bad mistake.

The cloud is not an option for myself either. Have my own site that I upload to for clients.

Lance

Legend
November 22, 2017

After some testing, the CC 2017 output module can be made to work in CC 2018 and will generate the same web galleries as before.

No, I'm not going to explain how, beyond it being fairly trivial. But if I could do it in a few minutes, Adobe certainly could.

Adobe is deprecating Flash so this removal may be tied to that. I'm hoping for the promised major re-write of Bridge to fix a lot of other issues and maybe web output will be added back in.

I suspect that the Bridge maintenance team is small and didn't have time to address things like that, which is why that feature is gone.

Inspiring
November 22, 2017

How very interesting!

No doubt that the web gallery situation is linked to demise of Flash, but most of us calling for a workable web gallery have stressed a "html" gallery as a web gallery which can't be viewed on an iOS device is useless.

I am not at all confident that there is a major Bridge re-write in the pipeline - I really wish I knew as we (working professionals) have to plan for the next jump in camera pixel count and Bridge is totally creaking as it is.

I'd love you to share the "how to" BTW

Peter

Known Participant
November 20, 2017

Thanks for the round up. I'm switching back to 2017 too until this is sorted out.

Participating Frequently
November 11, 2017

Workaround! From within CC, one can still download and install Psd CS6. This will also install Bridge CS6, in which the Web Gallery still exists. I did this, and it works as it should. I advise to throw away the Psd CS6 app, so images will open in CC 2018.

Known Participant
November 11, 2017

I think it's easier to install the 2017 version of bridge on top or instead of the 2018 version. Maybe it's necessary to install the outputmodule again. It's totally annoying to having to switch between the 2 applications but I have my webgalleries again.

Participating Frequently
November 11, 2017

In the 2017 version the Web Gallery is gone also. CS6 wil do the trick. And yes, it is annoying to switch. And yes WE WANT IT BACK.

Inspiring
November 11, 2017

Just another pro chiming in here...  Updated to Bridge 2018 yesterday.  Need to make a web gallery today.  Can't. Thanks a buttload, Adobe!

Either give pros the option to disable Import/Image Libraries in Lightroom, so we can manage our own workflow without this time-consuming step, or bring back the Web Gallery Output in Bridge.

One or the other, or both, ASAP, please!  Thanks for listening (right? I mean, you do listen to your customers, right?)

Known Participant
October 31, 2017

Dear Adobe,

why would you remove the web-output-module? Do you want us to use the cloud? Not an option: we are pro's, we take hundreds of pictures at 1 shoot. And sometimes all we have on location is crappy 3g via a telephone hotspot.

Do you want us to switch to Lightroom? Not an option for pro's: the importing is just annoying and time-consuming: we have great and clear archives on multiple external harddrives with different names and changing drive-letters (depending of how many drives are connected to our huge systems).

Is there another reason? Please tell us. Because we are all looking for alternatives.

I need an answer from Adobe.