How am I supposed to export several photos to JPEG? One by one in Photoshop? Really?

To be honest, I never saw the benefit of the export panel in its current state. It had far to less options for me.

Remember that for a simple task as saving as jpeg you always had the option to use the Image Processor. (menu tools / Photoshop / Image Processor)

But it seems you never used a batch command in Photoshop? This can be extremely helpful and very productional, yo can create an action by recording your steps in the action panel and use batch to play the action on a bunch of files selected in Bridge ( menu Tools / Photoshop / Batch).

With the current option to insert a conditional in an action (If-Then-Else) you can create a complicated action in PS for both landscape and portrait and then create a new action that gives you the option to assign both action (if landscape then play 'action landscape' (your action name), else play 'portrait'

It needs a tiny bit of study but it is not that difficult and as said, very productional.

For instance, I have several action for resizing. I also combined these with different sizes and using a conditional action. I select a bunch of files and with the batch command in Bridge (via tools) the selected images are saved in different sizes and stored in different folders (per size).

A few important rules when creating a save action, don't change the filename, not even touch this field, otherwise all files will end up with the same name and overwrite each other, and when you want to keep the original be sure to not save the changes when closing the document.

Try to discover yourself the enormous amount of options you already have with Image Processor and PS Batch using actions.

Recording an action is simple, create a new action and start playing around, most of your movements (not all) in PS will be recorded and when finished the action one push on the button plays it again and again

Before you start experimenting, be sure to first back up your originals so you can play freely with them without the risk of loosing

The way I create JPGs from Bridge is to use “Image Processor.”  Select all of the images in Bridge that you want to export (convert to JPEGs and output).  Then go to the Tools menu and select Photoshop and Image Processor.  Photoshop will open and present you with a dialog box that allows you to save the images in several different formats (JPEGs, PSD, or TIFF or all three at once), JPEG quality, resized or not resized, color profile changed to sRGB or left the way they were, etc.  Just select the options you want and click OK.  This works great regardless of whether you’ve selected one image or 100s of images in Bridge.  This process does use Photoshop, but you don’t have to do anything in Photoshop except select the options you want in the Image Processor dialog box.

One caveat is that I don’t have PS CC yet and, therefore, can verify that Photoshop/Bridge CC has the Image Processor option.  Would someone with CC please verify this for us?  Thanks.

I’m glad I could help you with a workaround.

I don’t want to start a debate on the pros and cons of the Export Panel versus the Image Processor, but I think the Image Processor is a little more flexible and both methods require about the same amount of steps.  One area where the Image Processor seems a little more flexible is the resizing option.  The Export Panel dialog box appears to just allow you to choose a size constraint with a single number, e.g. 1080, which implies you are constrained to a square box that is 1080 on a side.  The Image Processor allows you to choose both numbers, e.g. 1920 x 1080.  My example numbers are some I use a lot for resizing images for display on an HDTV (1920 x 1080) or 1920 x 1080 computer monitor.  Images from a point-and-shoot (4x3 aspect ratio) are resized to 1440 x 1080, and images from a DSLR (3x2 aspect ratio) are resized to 1620 x 1080.  If the Export Panel restricts the resize to a 1080 box, the images are resized to 1080 x 810 and 1080 x 720 which are much smaller images and don’t fill up an HDTV screen or an HD computer monitor.  I apologize if I’m missing something here because I’ve only used the Export Panel a few times.

In addition, the Image Processor allows you to choose an Action to run on every image.  I usually choose among several sharpening actions I have depending upon the size and final use of the images.

It probably just comes down to what you’re used to and that we don’t like to change.

And, for what I need, Bridge is much easier to use than Lightroom, which does have export capabilities...    

I'm testing Bridge CC and am hugely missing the export panel as well.  Editing and sorting seems faster than CS6, but then I went to use Tools> Photoshop> Image Processor and that TOOK FOREVER!  It had to open each RAW photo individually in Photoshop and downsample them.  Sure it was automated, but still... extremely inefficient.  I couldn't add a metadata profile/keywords for the exported JPGs either and there was NO PROGRESS BAR! 

With Bridge CS6, I could pop my camera's storage card into my tablet, generate thumbnails on the fly without copying them off the card... sort through and make adjustments to multiple selections right away, and then export them to low-resolution JPGs.  The advantage to the Export panel in Bridge CS6 was that I could save specific presets of desired resolutions and it also made JPGs from the cached preview images.  That made things MUCH faster.  I could create JPGs with resolutions less than my monitor size extremely efficiently. 

And I could do all of that without the hassle of importing the RAW files to a space-hogging database in Lightroom.  Bridge CS6's interface is so much more user-friendly than Lightroom's as well, especially on a tablet.  Scrollbars on the left side?  Come on, that's really poor design... if I have a stylus in my right hand, I have to reach all the way to the left of the screen and cover the stuff I need to see while scrolling.  Bridge & ACR have tabs that are much easier to flip between with one click to access all the settings.

To top it off, Bridge CC only supports high pixel density screens on Mac OS X... it still hasn't brought this support to Windows 8.  I don't really miss the web gallery export since that was broken the whole time... it put the images in a "bin" subfolder who's access is blocked on most web servers which mean all of the images quickly became inaccessible when copying that exported web gallery to a web server.

You are so right, come one Adobe fix this fast, or is this a new attempt to make us buy lightroom ??

As a test last week, after a fashion shoot, I processed the 300-400 photos using Bridge CS6 the normal way... browse straight to the camera's memory card plugged into my Surface Pro.. flip through each picture in full screen preview using the attached or on-screen keyboard (if I'm on the subway) to rank each RAW photo (or rank with multi-selections in thumbnail view)... add keywords/labels... select the high ranking ones in thumbnail view, open all in ACR, apply global adjustments and lens profile corrections...  then drop them into the export panel and upload low-resolution samples to the client.  It took about a half hour. (Bridge CS6's low-res JPG exports take mere seconds to complete.)

Then I tried to do that in Lightroom 5.  Lightroom requires "importing" all photos into a SECOND storage location and adding them to a database before you can even start to work with them.  This process took longer than the time it took me to actually finish the job in Bridge CS6. 

Disclaimer: I have never used LighRoom.  But I see more support for LR as it is "built for Photographers", and Bridge is just a file browser.  Right or wrong that seems to be the mentality.  Here is a link that pretty well continues this argument.  http://www.tipsquirrel.com/lightroom-vs-adobe-bridge-2/

Steffen1601 wrote:

 

…still hoping Adobe listens to its customers.

Adobe has been regarding its customers and former customers as adversaries at least for the past ten, maybe eleven years.  Evidently that is their current business model.

From various users comments you either hate LR or love it.  Many feel like you it is just a piece of garbage.  But don't expect Adobe to take the initiative on this issue.  They do not respond to a few disgruntled users.  It takes a concentrated effort by a lot users to get a problem corrected.

I was not a beta tester on this version, but my experiences with being a beta tester in past versions left me with this impression:  By the time the version is out for beta testing they do not want to make any additions to the program suggested by the beta testers.  They are just interested in fixing bugs that show up.  And as I understand it from this crop of beta testers demands were make changes, but they were ignored.

Windows 8 was probably a perfect example of the software engineers telling the public what they want vs what the testers said.

On a positive note it is rumored that the Export Pannel will be coming out as an add on.

How can a decision like this even happen? Is there a word for way-beyond-moronic? Adobe, how did the team that made this decision think we would react...f*%#$ tards!

This is certainly one of the top frustrations (of several) I am finding with the upgrade process from CS6.  The Export panel was vital to my workflow also, for batch resizing and exporting of images in the background without opening Photoshop.  I had saved numerous presets which made it very handy for me to create the needed derivitive files with simple drag and drop.  I suppose I will keep using CS6 until Adobe gets this functionality restored.

I'm amazed it's been taken out. I have thousands of graphics files in Illustrator and InDesign and exporting these to image files would be quite tedious without Bridge export. The export scripts allowed saving all pages of a document to various formats with very little effort. Surely this is one of the key functions of Bridge. Sticking with CS6 version until this is resolved.

^^ Yes, I must agree to CameraAnn, that Bridge must have full development dollars.

Instead Adobe seems to concentrate on the Lightroom thing,

what's this ?

Lightroom is just a fork of the Bridge in my opinion.

It's nothing else then CameraRaw + Bridge + a database (wow ) + a polished gui + A EXPORT PANEL

I don't like this kind of "evolution" ...

What also makes me (very) angry with this issue it that - look above:

- no staff member is saying something -

it's uncommon for such a long thread!

I hope that anybody at Adobe can tell us something ( or tell your managers about this fault )

COME ON

What are your plans:

* we won't add it, so you guys all have to buy Lightroom, or full subscription  (I think that is the main reason to remove export from the bridge)

* we will add it (but asap as possible ^^ see the posts above, don't tell us something like: oh, our apprentice has just deleted the code, we have to develop things from scratch , it's all there , we know it ! )

Well when Image Processor allows me to set up a folder under the current one I am working on named "For Viewing" WITHOUT my having to SELECT the source folder AND the OUTPUT folder then I will say Bravo. BUT until then I will export in CS5-way to GO Adobe (sarcasm).

Before ALL I had to do was:

Open a folder in bridge

Select files to be exported

Right click to export using my export preset and

VOILA, it converted RAW to JPG, resized AND put in a unique folder that i did not have to enter every time.

And a heck of a lot faster than Image Processor I might add!

"But it seems you never used a batch command in Photoshop?"

Just a TAD condescending I would say?

Even if Lightroom can do similar function to Bridge's Export panel, it is a tool designed primarily for Photographers!  If it is intended to replace Bridge, then why call it Lightroom?  No, Bridge is called "Bridge" because it is supposed to be the connector between Adobe's broad suite of programs.  What about all of the other non-photographers, like graphic designers, video editors, web developers, etc. that used the Export panel to make quick work of creating JPEGs in a specific size?  Do they really have to install and learn Lightroom now, or even Photoshop's Image Processor (which still is clunky compared to simple Export presets)?  What about the photographers even, who don't own Lightroom?  Perhaps they are getting along fine with the Photoshop-only subscription?  Personally, I primarily use my Adobe CC suite for photography, but occasionally too for web development or video (the only reason I can barely justify the full subscription).  I have not yet embraced Lightroom, because aside from the database, it is grossly redundant with Bridge/ACR.  In fact, I prefer Bridge in some ways, especially because I don't have to Import new files and deal with managing catalogs, I just simply browse to the folder.  I had found the Bridge Export panel to be an invaluable timesaving tool in all of these areas of discipline.

Please Adobe, just bring the Export panel back and stop making me resent my $50/mo. subscription even more!

Slightly off topic (for web designers): Don't even get me started on my other CC frustrations.  Oops, too late.  Fireworks is a prime example! Why am I paying more for less Adobe?  I've been happily using Fireworks (together with Dreamweaver) since before the Macromedia acquisition, and I find it very disappointing to see the program completely dropped in CC.  Yet another (major) change in workflow I am being forced to adapt to.  I don't even know which program is supposed to replace Fireworks?  Photoshop? No. InDesign? Maybe?  I suspect the way I have been building websites (for over 10 years) will not even be possible with these other programs.  Where do I send the bill for all of this lost productivity while I completely re-learn my trade with all new tools?  I bet Dreamweaver is sad to have its life partner banished from the club.  I guess I should vent these frustrations on a Fireworks forum, if such a thing exists anymore?