Food Bloggers Giving Restaurant Owners Heartburn

crimeandpunishment writes "Call it the invasion of the pasta paparazzi. Food bloggers are so excited about sharing their experiences, especially at trendy, popular restaurants, that they're too busy taking pictures and video to enjoy the food when it's at its best. Many signature dishes come out at the perfect temperature ... take a few minutes to capture what it looks like, and your palate won't be nearly as pleased. Some restaurants have taken the step of banning cameras, or at least have established a 'no flash' rule. Others just want to make sure enthusiastic reviewers are still enthused after eating their food."

Comments

And once again

[Cheezymadman]

People fail to realize that the point of food is to enjoy the taste. It doesn't matter how it looks, as long as it tastes good.

Re:And once again

[DarkKnightRadick]

Actually how it looks is just as important as taste and smell. When you eat a meal, the first part of your body that perceives the meal is your eyes. Most people will not eat food that looks unappetizing. Next is your nose (which strongly correlates with your taste buds). Many more people will not eat food that smells unappetizing. Only then does taste play a role. Almost no one will eat food that tastes unappetizing.

Want citations? Look 'em up yourself.

Re:And once again

[FoolishOwl]

No, the point of food is to maintain health and strength. Whether you enjoy eating it is secondary to that.

Re:And once again

[jjoelc]

I think it depends on expectations. Most of the time, I could care less what the food looks like. Presentation plays absolutely no role in 99% of the food I eat. If things like atmosphere and occasion are the primary reasons I am eating.. then sure, make it look pretty.

Also, a minor quibble, but you generally can smell food (cooking or being served) long before being able to see the food. Ever been walking through the mall and smelled the cinnabon? From 10 stores away?

Of course, the sight and smell are reasons I can't stand any kind of seafood, long before the taste hits my palate and informs me I should have known better than to believe the jackass who swears that this kind of fish, cooked in this particular way doesn't taste fishy...

Re:And once again

[skine]

My issue is more that it's simply inappropriate to take pictures in restaurants fancier than IHOP (excepting special occasions, of course).

This is especially true in restaurants that are worthy of reviewing.

Re:And once again

[skine]

Most people will not eat food that looks unappetizing.

Obviously you're not from Rochester, NY. Our best known local dish not only looks ugly, but it has an ugly name as well. Then again, Nick Tahou's makes some delicious Garbage Plates.

Re:And once again

[T Murphy]

There's food the basic resource, and food the product of the art of cooking. If you are going out to a restaurant, you are paying for the latter kind of food. In developed countries, your definition rarely applies, as shown by many people choosing food for taste and ignoring the health part.

Re:And once again

[Ethanol-fueled]

No, the point of food is to maintain health and strength. Whether you enjoy eating it is secondary to that.

Back when humans were picking berries and hunting for a living, yes. But nowdays it's the other way around -- ask any 400-pound fatass who routinely chooses Big Macs over the bean salad.

Re:And once again

[Twinbee]

Somehow I think the hunter gatherers would prefer the big macs too.

Re:And once again

[FoolishOwl]

To be honest, I keep flirting with taking a contrarian position, and insisting that people should stop worrying about whether food tastes good, much less whether it looks good. There seem to be so many problems with people eating unhealthy food, or eating too much food, and wasting food, and so on, that I sometimes wish people would just take a utilitarian attitude towards food.

Re:And once again

[__aasqbs9791]

I have no sense of smell, you insensitive clod! *

*That's not a joke.

Re:And once again

[Trailwalker]

While on one of my long distance hikes, I would occasionally pass a country store and purchase a 24 oz can of a never before heard of brand of beef stew. I would pour this into my pot, add a cup of minute rice and some beef bouillon and top with a cup of water. Heated, this made a quart and a half of murky grayish brown gruel. It was a real treat and the pot was licked clean.

At home, I can not even look at a plate of this concoction, much less eat it.

Nothing like the ambiance of the mountains, day after day of dehydrated crud for food to make anything different a tasty feast fit for the gods.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

The point of food is to provide nourishment. It could taste and look like shit, the point is to keep you alive

Re:And once again

[bmo]

"chooses Big Macs over the bean salad."

McDonald's has bean salad?

Woah.

--
BMO

Re:And once again

[bmo]

Food puritanism is just as offensive as religious puritanism.

And the veggies ain't done unless you've added the salt pork, old world style.

--
BMO

Re:And once again

[wwfarch]

And they're amazingly good. I grab one every time I head back to Rochester to visit my family.

Re:And once again

[GWBasic]

People fail to realize that the point of food is to enjoy the taste. It doesn't matter how it looks, as long as it tastes good.

Well, that might be if you're going to a cafeteria or buying packaged food. At elite gourmet restaurants, it's a combination of taste, appearance, and atmosphere. Seriously, would you want to eat a "gourmet" meal served under harsh florescent lighting that looked ugly?

Re:And once again

[NotQuiteReal]

So, nothing looks good to the blind... how sad.

And, to add insult to injury, it is not "polite" to use the braille method to "see" your food.

Re:And once again

[DarkKnightRadick]

I think you'd be surprised just how much your sense of sight plays in your food choices. Most of it isn't even a conscious choice.

You are right, smell does sense further than sight most of the time. But in a restaurant with competing smells, it's only when you can see what you are supposed to be smelling (your own food) that it gets heightened and "zeros in" on your own food.

Not sure why you dislike seafood so much, but to each their own. (: I have yet to come across a food that I didn't like (or at least try once).

Re:And once again

[DarkKnightRadick]

I'm not necessarily talking about presentation.

Re:And once again

[FoolishOwl]

It's not so much food puritanism, on my part, anyway. It's that I think food is intrinsically uninteresting, and I'd rather we got cooking and eating done quickly so we can talk about or do things that are actually interesting. There are simple, nutritious foods that taste good; spending more time on preparing food to trick it up into something more elaborate seems to me to be a waste of time.

Re:And once again

[thrawn_aj]

It should be, "It doesn't matter how it looks, if it doesn't taste good". If it does taste good, better looks will enhance the taste (for the reasons you mentioned). But (unless you're a food snob), a shitty tasting dish will not taste better just because it's all dressed up (sort of like the deeply disturbed troll who also replied to GP o.O).

Re:And once again

[jo42]

Most people will not eat food that looks unappetizing. Next is your nose (which strongly correlates with your taste buds). Many more people will not eat food that smells unappetizing.

That absolutely does not explain ethnic cooking that billions of people eat every day that smells like the back end of a garbage dump in the middle of a hot day in July.

Re:And once again

[Kjella]

Tasting good is probably a step up from the usual long distance food. I remember a few lines from a nature show I watched about a guy who spent 365 days traveling the arctic cap. It was something like "For every day I get a northern pike so I don't have to eat porridge, I thank the lord. But every time I get a trout, I thank the lord it's not a northern pike." Oddly enough I've found some extremely good camping food produced by DryTech, apparently they also deliver the Norwegian field rations. Freeze dried, just add fresh water and boil for a few minutes on a gas burner and you have a really good hot meal. They're hardly cheap though, but extremely practical at 150 grams/package.

Re:And once again

[bmo]

You are obviously someone who has never had a good meal in his life.

Where is this epicurean desert that you live in that I can avoid it?

Given the choice between some good labor intensive peasant food (I'm Polish) and "utilitarian food," I'm going to be loading the plate up with some pierogis thanks.

Saying that eating should only be for nutrition is like saying sex should only be for reproduction. I reject your outlook. It is without enjoyment. It is spartan for the sole reason of utility. It is a dour, rainy day in late November.

--
BMO

Re:And once again

[sjwt]

How could it be inappropriate, when we have some of these super fancy restaurants running friggin game shows? I understand not using flash photography, a decent lens will get you around that, and if you are eating at a ''fancier'' place you should be able to afford one.

As to your second point, all restaurants are worthy of reviewing, the point of reviewing is not to look at places where the foods costs more then some people earn in a week, it is to scale the value, quality, cost and service into a meaningful form that is useful to others who can compare it.

I have in my life only been to 5 rather expensive places to eat (no super expensive places), only two of those rated a returned visit. I have 4 places in my own list of sheep places that rank higher then 3 of those expensive places.

Re:And once again

[rfuilrez]

Maybe his choice happened before he left the house? Or sent his mom to go get it for him I mean....

Re:And once again

[zippthorne]

Uh.. Just because it's not "dressed up" doesn't mean it's not ugly. Fancy restaurants might go overboard on the presentation, but the picture on wikipedia doesn't look any more unappetizing than any chili & sausage combo. I.e. heartburn on a plate, which is a bit of a mixed bag, really. Frankly, it's appearance is most reminiscent of your typical pot-luck dinner after you've walked through the buffet line.

Now, I'm sure Natto and Corn Smut are delicious, but I dare you to attempt to eat either one of them after just taking a look at them. "garbage plate" doesn't even make the list of unappetizing presentations.

Re:And once again

[bsane]

I think food is intrinsically uninteresting

I'm assuming you're Dutch...

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Going to McDonalds for a salad is like going to a prostitute for a hug.

Re:And once again

[zippthorne]

I dunno. Healthy foods can taste *really* good, and look good too, with their vibrant colors. Unhealthy food only really tastes comfortable, and of course there's the slight bump from the fats and sugars that were once scanty in our pre-civilization diet.

It's also more expensive, though, which I think is the real problem. An overdone ground-beef patty, mayonnaise, some wilty lettuce and a slice of partially hydrogenated vegetable oils with some fat-soaked potato slices and tomato & corn syrup preserves on the side is not only cheap to produce, but the ingredients store well for long periods unrefrigerated.

I'm not convinced "taxing it" is the answer either, as then this comfortable, unhealthy mix will be unavailable to the poor, but they won't magically be able to afford healthy food as a result...

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought epicurean was: "Devoted to the pursuit of sensual pleasure, especially to the enjoyment of good food and comfort." An epicurean desert would have desserts. Now, granted, that's not quite the philosophy of Epicurus, but that's how the word is used lately.

Re:And once again

[timothy]

Have never been there, but this is one reason I want to. My sister-in-law is from not too far, and talked about these things. Looks like a fantastic snack :) Enough food to get through a movie or book, even ...

Tim

Re:And once again

[timothy]

The point of food is to provide nourishment. It could taste and look like shit, the point is to keep you alive

Is that what the mushrooms told you? Did it wear off eventually?

Re:And once again

[onionman]

I have no sense of smell, you insensitive clod! *

*That's not a joke.

Why is this modded "Troll"? I know someone with no sense of smell, and it seems to be a minor handicap.

I've also met far too many people with no sense of taste!

Re:And once again

[Shadow of Eternity]

Have you ever been to the middle or far east? There's a whole lot of amazingly delicious foods that look, and sometimes smell, roughly like someone has already eaten them.

Re:And once again

[X0563511]

Grouper (the real stuff) doesn't taste fishy if it's not old.

Raw tuna (preferably sushi/sashimi grade...) doesn't taste anything like fish, surprisingly. Salmon is nasty, though. I haven't tried any others.

It really is true, not all fish prepared right tastes fishy.

Re:And once again

[X0563511]

... I should mention I can't eat anything remotely fishy. Makes me heave.

Oddly, Calamari is not among those things.

Re:And once again

[X0563511]

Especially not after reading about them.

Beans & Mucus is bad enough by look, but then you find out they have been 'fermented' in a bacteria? Erm...

Fecal Corn is also bad enough. But then you get to find out it's moldy corn. Yay.

Re:And once again

[onionman]

We always called it "hunger sauce," and it really does make the dried beans that are only partially re-hydrated much tastier. Funny how I could live on $3/day worth of food on the trail, but I spend more than that on coffee some mornings on the way in to work.

Re:And once again

[X0563511]

Burn out taste buds and I bet your wish would be granted :P

Shame you can't selectively make poor nutrition taste bad while letting good food stay tasty. Also, less of a pain in the ass. I eat very poorly, because I'm lazy. If you could make proper food as easy/fast to obtain as a "taco" then I will sell you my soul.

Re:And once again

[FoolishOwl]

Speaking of Epicurus, my understanding is that while he argued that a good life was a life of pleasure, his attitude seemed to be that pleasure followed from avoiding pain, which basically calls for moderation: e.g., the pain that results from gluttony overpowers the pleasure of it, so you're happier if you don't indulge in gluttony.

Part of my attitude, I suppose, is that on the one hand, I've never known anyone who died, or really suffered much, because they danced too much, listened to too much music, wore too many different outfits, watched too many movies, read too many books, had too many conversations, played too many computer games, went hiking too many times, visited too many museums, or grew too many flowers.

On the other hand, I've known people who died, and several more who nearly died, because they wouldn't stop eating food that was unhealthy for them.

I'm a little unusual in my attitude towards food, and I've been exaggerating that attitude, in this discussion, to be contrarian.

But my underlying point is that fundamentally, food is about health. Given the choice of two foods of equal nutritional value, sure, choose the one that tastes better. But it seems to me to be fundamentally perverse to place the taste, texture, and appearance of food above its material function.

Re:And once again

[Wildclaw]

Nothing like the ambiance of the mountains, day after day of dehydrated crud for food to make anything different a tasty feast fit for the gods.

The taste of food is intrinsically linked to how much your body needs it. And it even goes down in more detail as to what kind of food your body needs. It is fascinating really. Especially how quickly the taste adepts once you get the needed mineral/vitamin into your system.

Re:And once again

[FoolishOwl]

That sounds very much like a bit in Hemingway's short story, "Big Two-Hearted River," where he describes a backpacker cooking a similar meal from two cans of food over a stove.

Re:And once again

[bmo]

gluttony

Nobody has been arguing for gluttony. Not in the thread, not in the summary and not in the story. You have set something up and pointed at it and called it ridiculous. This is known as the straw man.

and I've been exaggerating that attitude, in this discussion, to be contrarian.

It's called trolling.

But it seems to me to be fundamentally perverse to place the taste, texture, and appearance of food above its material function.

It seems perverse to me that you think people shouldn't treat themselves from time to time and eat food they like and enjoy themselves. You equate this with gluttony, and I find this sad, and in the light of your list of "permissible excesses" paragraph, hypocritical.

You have not made a sensible point. You have written nonsense.

--
BMO

Re:And once again

[bsDaemon]

Without a sense of smell, you hardly taste anything... including if something is or might be poisonous, either because of its nature, or because its spoiled. You can't smell smoke, which is an early indicator of fire, and you can't smell a gas leak. Smell is pretty friggin' important to actual survival, so I'm not sure I'd classify it as minor.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

The mushroom told me nothing the cat told me a hole lot.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

And words are just for communication - singing is just unnecessary vocalization. And sex is just about reproduction - enjoying it or performing it for anything besides reproduction seems perverse, no?

So some people you know are unhealthy eaters. That does not mean food is evil.

You have [deity]-given taste buds - it's a shame you're not putting them to good use. For me, the smell of sautéing onions and garlic is one of the simpler pleasures in life.

Re:And once again

[commodore64_love]

>>>who swears that this kind of fish, cooked in this particular way doesn't taste fishy

You ought to try tilapia, straight up without flavoring. It's about as bland as eating chicken, and is the only fish I enjoy.

Re:And once again

[__aasqbs9791]

This is true. When I clean the cat box it is only because my eyes sting that I know the ammonia smell is very bad.

OTOH, irritating smells (like a co-worker's foot odor) doesn't bother me. And so far hasn't been harmful. ;-)

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Going to McDonalds for a salad is like going to a prostitute for a chat .

There, Fixed that for you.

Re:And once again

[hobo sapiens]

Presentation betrays the care that was taken in preparing your food.

I think presentation is very important, but then again, I really enjoy going to more upscale restaurants. I'd rather go somewhere nice once a month (or every other month even) than go to places like Applebee's every week. If you don't care about presentation then you might fall into the latter category.

Re:And once again

[Duradin]

Ya, the first bits of practical chemistry (and microbiology) practiced by humans is so totally not interesting.

Re:And once again

[aevan]

Heh. Flavour? You can't have that, we'll boil that out of it yet!

There are some damned good Dutch dishes..but were there ever a lot of bland ones growing up.

Although the dutch east indies dishes...yum.

Re:And once again

[hobo sapiens]

No, McDonalds has been salad. As in, it has been salad. What it is now is anybody's guess.

Re:And once again

[hobo sapiens]

"I have 4 places in my own list of sheep places that rank higher then 3 of those expensive places."

I prefer goat places, myself.

Re:And once again

[jhjjhj]

Rich people worry about how dinner is presented

Middle class worry if it's tasty.

Poor people worry if there is enough.

Re:And once again

[DarkKnightRadick]

do you realize that sauerkraut and kimchi are fermented before served? As is Natto?

Re:And once again

[dangitman]

Of course, the sight and smell are reasons I can't stand any kind of seafood, long before the taste hits my palate and informs me I should have known better than to believe the jackass who swears that this kind of fish, cooked in this particular way doesn't taste fishy...

It's impossible to take the opinion of someone who doesn't like any seafood seriously, when it comes to talking about food. I'd say the same about people who dismiss any broad category of food (meat, vegetables, fish, grain) out-of-hand. With the possible exception of those who don't eat certain categories for ethical reasons (i.e: vegetarians). I'd still listen to their opinion on vegetable-based food. But just not liking everything in any of these categories demonstrates a poorly developed palate and inexperience with food.

Re:And once again

[dangitman]

There seem to be so many problems with people eating unhealthy food, or eating too much food, and wasting food, and so on, that I sometimes wish people would just take a utilitarian attitude towards food.

The problem with this position is that the "gourmet" approach is often one and the same as the utilitarian approach. Many top chefs advocate "nose to tail" eating, where every part of the animal is used. They have no problems enjoying things that many people consider "gross" as delicacies. They understand not wasting food.

So, it seems to me that the best way to accomplish your goal is actually to encourage the aesthetic, artistic, "gourmet" approach of the foodie, rather than rejecting our tastes. Enhance our tastes to enjoy more variety, rather than the limited range of taste the non-foodie subsists on.

Re:And once again

[nelsonal]

Ironically, at the high end most of what prostitutes do a lot of chatting.

What high-end clients pay for may surprise you. For example, according to my ongoing interviews of several hundred sex workers, approximately 40 percent of trades in New York's sex economy fail to include a physical act beyond light petting or kissing. No intercourse, no oral stimulation, etc. That's one helluva conversation. But it's what many clients want. Flush with cash, these elite men routinely turn their prostitute into a second partner or spouse. Over the course of a year, they will sometimes persuade the woman to take on a new identity, replete with a fake name, a fake job, a fake life history, and so on. They may want to have sex or they may simply want to be treated like King for a Day.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

An easy example: Drink some gatorade. Then work out like mad. Play basketball or rugby with friends or go running, just wear yourself out. Then drink more gatorade, suddenly it actually tastes good.

Re:And once again

[snowgirl]

It is a dour, rainy day in late November.

Seattle?

Re:And once again

[UtucXul]

No mod points so I'll just have to reply to say that you sir, could not be more right. Nothing in the DC area that is anything like a Garbage Plate.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when does ground beef keep well unrefrigerated (or lettuce for that matter but i doubt that would kill you)? I don't think I would eat at your restaurant.

Re:And once again

[snowgirl]

A "linguistic desert" is a desert devoid of language. A "clue desert" would be a desert devoid of clues.

An epicurean desert would lack any sensual pleasure, particularly to the enjoyment of good food and comfort.

Feel free to disagree, I don't think that there are clear linguistic answers to which would be the proper interpretation. Ambiguity is the spice of language.

Re:And once again

[Fluffeh]

Smell is pretty friggin' important to actual survival, so I'm not sure I'd classify it as minor.

If I had to pick which sense I was going to lose, smell would be it. I don't disagree that it's useful, but compared to sight, hearing, touch it rates pretty small. Same with taste.

What would you prefer to keep if you had a choice? Taste/smell or sight?

Re:And once again

[Fluffeh]

... I should mention I can't eat anything remotely fishy. Makes me heave.

Oddly, Calamari is not among those things.

Most seafood that isn't a fish generally doesn't taste like fish though. Crab, lobster, mussels, oysters, even octopus generally don't taste all that similar to fish.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Ethical? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Tell me why then they try so hard yet fail to make everything look and taste like e.g. a burger. Watch any vege show, watch how what they make looks like dogshit. Watch how they don't even get excited when eating it, even when faking it. Because it tastes like shit. No amount of seasoning can change that. Except for chemicals, oh so now that's OK to eat. Manufactured chemicals are way better than naturally grown products.

Ethics has nothing to do with it. It's about being cool, hip, fitting in, like a typical high schooler. FYI to all vege-whatever-wannabes out there...soy is BAD for you. Read up on it. I agree and I "say the same about people who dismiss any broad category of food (meat, vegetables, fish, grain) out-of-hand." What's killing/hurting you is not eating a balanced diet. There are so many things we don't understand or even look for in food that's good for us that actually are the reason for being healthy. Eat it, enjoy it, don't try to fit in.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, he could be from England and doesn't realize the war is over. No more rationing! YAY!

Re:And once again

[snowgirl]

To be honest, I keep flirting with taking a contrarian position, and insisting that people should stop worrying about whether food tastes good, much less whether it looks good. There seem to be so many problems with people eating unhealthy food, or eating too much food, and wasting food, and so on, that I sometimes wish people would just take a utilitarian attitude towards food.

The problem is keeping food palatable. Take out all the fat (or most of it) and it becomes unpalatable. So, they add tons of sugar to make it palatable again. Or, they add tons of salt for the same purpose.

As an insightful sibling comment mentioned, chefs take a much more reasoned approach to food. Proper portions, good taste, and proper balance of nutritional elements.

When food takes a half hour to an hour to cook, then a lot more attention is paid to what food's purpose is, rather than pulling up to the drive through and having it handed to you.

As with many of the problems in the careless and reckless nature of humans is that the root of it is laziness.

Re:And once again

[dangitman]

Ethical? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Uhh, what? It's still an ethical stance, even if you don't agree with it. Different people have different ethical rules.

Tell me why then they try so hard yet fail to make everything look and taste like e.g. a burger.

Who exactly are you talking about? I know plenty of vegetarians and vegans who don't do that shit. Even if they do, I'm not sure what your point is.

Watch any vege show, watch how what they make looks like dogshit. Watch how they don't even get excited when eating it, even when faking it.

You're taking your opinions on vegetarianism from fucking TV?? That's about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Except for chemicals, oh so now that's OK to eat. Manufactured chemicals are way better than naturally grown products.

Again, plenty of veggies are also pro-organic and don't eat processed foods. Some even grow most of their own food.

Ethics has nothing to do with it. It's about being cool, hip, fitting in, like a typical high schooler.

For some people maybe, but not for all. Your statement doesn't make a lot of sense, because vegans and vegetarians are a minority, and don't typically "fit in" and often have problems doing so.

Re:And once again

[laejoh]

My dog has no nose. * *That's a joke.

Re:And once again

[Naznarreb]

Taste, texture, smell, presentation: all these things factor (to various degrees) into weather or not you like something, and the proper balance of all three is important. I'm pretty sure that I could whip up something that tasted great, but looked so awful or was served in a manner that makes it completely unappetizing to you.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

"I could care less what the food looks like." Then do so. The term is "couldn't care less."

Re:And once again

[T Murphy]

As someone who has no taste for seafood, I can attest tuna from a can tastes amazing when out backpacking. I spent a week at the Boundary Waters in northern Minnasota- it's beautiful out there, I learned you really can see the Milky Way at night (as a lifelong Chicagoan I was oblivious to what you can see without a telescope), and I suggest bringing pancake mix in case you find wild blueberries.

If you've never been backpacking and you have interest, I suggest you do so- despite all the work of paddling hiking and pitching tents, it is actually really relaxing. Best vacation I've ever been on.

Re:And once again

[Dahamma]

Unhealthy food only really tastes comfortable

Taste as a matter of enjoyment is subjective, as to a lesser extent is "healthy".

For an example of the former - you would have to drag me kicking and screaming into a McDonalds, but last week I had a medium rare kobe beef burger with blue cheese and bacon that was just goddamn perfection. Sadly, I am pretty sure it was less "healthy" on many metrics than a Big Mac.

For an example of the latter - I have high blood pressure, so I consider foods with a lot of sodium fairly unhealthy. My girlfriend has low blood pressure, so she doesn't really care about salt. And unfortunately for me but not her, sometimes salty food just tastes GOOD. On the other hand, I have very low cholesterol, and she doesn't. So I don't particularly consider bacon and a couple of eggs for breakfast unhealthy, but she has to moderate those meals a bit...

Ain't genetics a bitch?

Then again, I think the above rant puts me squarely in the "enjoy food" camp, so I am a lot closer to your position than the GP. I just roll my eyes any time someone tries to claim food should be for sustenance and not enjoyment. Yeah, sure, the human race will live on as long as you manage to eat, shit, screw, and die, in that general order. But the goal of almost every single thing we do beyond that is to improve upon that baseline.

Re:And once again

[Dahamma]

Yeah, totally! I found these mushrooms in the woods last night - they looked a bit weird, bright yellow and orange and waxy. But oh, did they taste good in that stir fry! Of course, I seem to be almost completely blind today and I think I have lost all sensation in my legs, but damn did they taste good...

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Burn out taste buds and I bet your wish would be granted :P

Without taste buds, you'll base your food on texture. Granted that might help really shift your eating habits as I'm guessing once you can't taste things like fat, foods like creamy dressings would feel more 'slimy'...

Re:And once again

[Dahamma]

Actually, there are fairly "standard" definitions for "minor handicap" (basically "reduced quality of life but able to function normally without assistance") and loss of sense of smell is squarely in that camp. Eating a poisonous item you can't identify by other means, or smelling smoke and gas are emergency situations that are pretty rare in modern life, ie. a minority of people would ever encounter anyway. Not that it wouldn't suck royally in the quality of life area not to taste most of your food...

Re:And once again

[Dahamma]

It's not so much puritanism, on my part, anyway. It's that I think sex is intrinsically uninteresting, and I'd rather we got foreplay and sex done quickly so we can talk about or do things that are actually interesting. There are simple, efficient tools that feel good; spending more time on foreplay to trick it up into something more elaborate seems to me to be a waste of time.

Re:And once again

[shentino]

If I was a plant I'd wholeheartwoodedly agree with you.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

I've done both. On the same night.

Re:And once again

[Gordonjcp]

Again, plenty of veggies are also pro-organic and don't eat processed foods.

Can you be vegan and eat organic? That organic fertiliser comes from animals, you know. Okay, so it comes from the animal once the animal has finished with it, but is that enough?

It's something that the "ZOMG IT TAKES LIKE ELEVENTY MILLION KILOS OF GRAIN TO MAKE A KILO OF BEEF" crowd forget - a lot of what animals eat just comes back out. It gets turned into really really good fertiliser. Tonnes of it.

Re:And once again

[Gordonjcp]

It is a dour, rainy day in late November.

I *like* dour, rainy late November days. Perfect for dressing in black, getting into the huge old 80s Citroën and driving around the rainy towns listening to Portishead.

Re:And once again

[dangitman]

Can you be vegan and eat organic? That organic fertiliser comes from animals, you know.

Not necessarily. You can make fertilizer purely from vegetable waste. Or crude oil for that matter!

The question of whether excrement counts as an "animal product" for vegan purposes is an interesting question. Not being a vegan, I don't really care, but I think the main consideration is whether the animals are farmed specifically for their products or not. But there are many different vegan philosophies, so that may be way off depending on who you speak to.

Re:And once again

[amRadioHed]

You should always try foods at least twice. First reactions to new things aren't always reliable.

Re:And once again

[M8e]

The cat should have told you that food is for exercise, fun, and nourishment.

Chase 'em, kill 'em, eat 'em.

Re:And once again

[msimm]

You are obviously someone who has never had a good wife.

Re:And once again

[Gordonjcp]

You can make compost from vegetable waste, but it's very time-consuming and because the cellulose is tough to break down it's not as good. Ruminant digestive systems break down cellulose, which is why cow dung is wet and splattery and horse dung is dry and fibrous. Stable manure doesn't rot down as well as byre manure, but they both rot down a lot better than just dead plants.

Re:And once again

[dangitman]

You can make compost from vegetable waste, but it's very time-consuming and because the cellulose is tough to break down it's not as good.

Yes, but people still do it. It's very commonplace. Even if they also use animal or chemical fertilizers, most home gardeners also compost their vegetable waste.

Regarding the vegan thing, I've seen vegans go to extreme lengths to preserve the purity of their lifestyle. Composting being time consuming is hardly a blip on the radar when you're also making your own soy milk and tofu, avoiding all pre-processed foods and using only hand-powered implements to process raw ingredients.

Re:And once again

[amRadioHed]

What's wrong with bacteria? Yogurt and sauerkraut are both pretty tasty, I'm okay with whatever it takes to make them.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't actually smell a gas leak in nature, we actually add the 'gas' smell to it :)

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Fermentation is what makes things taste: soy sauce, miso, sauerkraut, kimchi, salami, yoghurt, smetana..

Re:And once again

[bmo]

I was going to reply to the post, but then I saw the "Anonymous Coward" name and decided "it's not worth it, they're not going to read it."

But thanks. :-D

With regards to the Owl guy, I got trolled hard.

--
BMO

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Smell is pretty friggin' important to actual survival, so I'm not sure I'd classify it as minor.

On the plus side, not being able to smell can also be a killer feature: 15 minutes saved per day, not having to shower.

Re:And once again

[w_dragon]

Given that we can taste 5 different things, but we can smell over 2000, I would keep smell. Most of what we 'taste' is actually being sensed by smell.

Re:And once again

[TheRaven64]

Note that this is only broadly true. For example, salt was very difficult to obtain in sufficient quantities for most of our evolutionary history, so our bodies are naturally biased towards wanting more salt than they need, so that they will have a surplus. The same is true for fats in winter - if you just eat what tastes good, then you will put on more weight in the winter than the summer because your body is adding a layer of insulation and a reserve for when food is more scarce. It takes more than a couple of generations of relatively abundant food availability to counter a billion years of weather dependence.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

For the life of me, I cannot remember my password. However, I have to reply, surely, you are trolling and I am not quite sure why you are modded insightful, but I am Dutch and I can guarantee you most Dutch do care about food. I am not sure where you are from but if it is the U.S. (to which I have been numerous times), I would like to remind you that virtually every restaurant thinks it is fine to serve mash potatoes next to your food, as a side dish is the epitome of culinary achievement.

Re:And once again

[lena_10326]

It doesn't matter how it looks, as long as it tastes good

Tell that to a French chef... they'll throw a cleaver at your head.

Re:And once again

[Antique Geekmeister]

I'm sorry, but the sense of sight certainly affects the experience of a meal as much as the appearance of a date affects a date. While something that is awful may not overcome its physical taste with appearance, a mediocre dish will taste better if presented well. And a fabulous dish prepared poorly loses some of its savor if presented poorly. It's as true of children as it is of adults. Give a child their meal on their favorite froggy face plate, with the bread cut into squares (not triangles, mom, you know how I like it!) and their new sippy glass (not the bottle, that's for babies!) and they may appreciate the meal far more, even if it contains corn.

Re:And once again

[mwvdlee]

Vegan != vegetarian.

Re:And once again

[DarkKnightRadick]

Don't forget Natto.

I know fermentation is what gives those foods its taste. He's trying to say certain ethnic foods taste/smell horrible yet here we are eating these fermented foods in this country that probably get the same reaction from them.

Re:And once again

[DarkKnightRadick]

true, but I generally get a healthy serving of new foods just to overcome that initial first reaction. This way I can have several reactions in one sitting.

Re:And once again

[owlstead]

Many people that are used to snacking would be amazed how few tasty carrot is needed to do away with hunger. Your body just does not crave as much fat as you think it does. As long as you have to order a second dish at McDonalds next to your burger you'll just know that it's not good for you. Besides it containing too much fat, it also just does not provide you with any worthwhile nutriments. You'll feel hungry until you eat too much for your stomach. At least, that's my feeling about it - I haven't conducted a scientific study on it.

Re:And once again

[Alamais]

Um, it's quite possible that they're simply very sensitive to some compound in fish. I, for one, can't stand even the slightest taste of raw onion: makes me nauseous, and the aftertaste lingers for me way longer--over a day sometimes--than for others, overshadowing anything else I eat or drink. That doesn't mean I'm 'inexperienced' or unwilling to try new things, but after plenty of goes, I just know I need to avoid raw onions.

Re:And once again

[Alamais]

Oh, come on, you know you want some Infected Corn!

Re:And once again

[Hognoxious]

If something is off, I'd rather know before I put it in my mouth.

Re:And once again

[Hognoxious]

According to something I read years ago in a magazine, edible food isn't very photogenic. When you see food pictures in books it's often got dyes and varnish and powder on it. And it's generally cold, partly due to the setting up time and also to avoid fogging the lenses.

I'm a pretty competent photographer and a pretty competent cook, and when I do try to take pics of something I've made it doesn't look like the naked eye sees it. Of course I'm usually doing it in a hurry because there's hungry impatient people around...

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Gas pipes don;t occur in nature, you cunt.

Re:And once again

[Hognoxious]

People fail to realize that the point of food is to enjoy the taste.

I thought it was to keep you alive?

Re:And once again

[dzfoo]

I thought commas and apostrophes were the spice of language.

          -dZ.

Re:And once again

[snowgirl]

From your other post:

and I've been exaggerating that attitude, in this discussion, to be contrarian.

It's called trolling.

You're absolutely right here. What he is describing is entirely literally what "trolling" is. He's just dressing it up in pretty language.

Re:And once again

[bmo]

Rhode Island.

Summers can be spectacular here. Fall is nice until the rain starts, and then the snow, and then the dark, and everyone hides out until late March. That's unless you ski, then you're off to New Hampshire or Vermont every weekend. But of course, ski snobs from the Rockies and Olympics think the mountains here are merely hills.

--
BMO

Re:And once again

[snowgirl]

Summers can be spectacular here.

WTF is this "summer" thing? I looked it up on Wikipedia, but it makes no sense. They seem to be talking about that one week, where we can walk around without an umbrella, but it's still a little unclear...

Re:And once again

[dangitman]

Um, it's quite possible that they're simply very sensitive to some compound in fish. I, for one, can't stand even the slightest taste of raw onion:

Well, that's unfortunate, but people with such problems shouldn't really be commenting critically on food. It would be like someone with color-blindness trying to judge the use of color in art, or someone who is tone-deaf writing music reviews.

Re:And once again

[misexistentialist]

Soon I will be bringing to market a tasty environmentally friendly green wafer that will meet all your nutritional needs.

Re:And once again

[I_M_Noman]

Don't forget Natto.

Please, I'd desperately LOVE to forget natto.

Re:And once again

[bmo]

The Great Northwet.

My bro lived out there for 10 years. He's came back a few years ago. He liked Seattle quite a bit.

--
BMO

Re:And once again

[bradley13]

not all fish prepared right tastes fishy.

I'll go one farther: no fish, prepared correctly, tastes fishy. The fishy smell comes, AFAIK, from fish oils going rancid. Fish has to be fresh, prepared quickly and served. Alternatively, it can be preserved by smoking or other means - but must, of course, be fresh when processed.

Take trout, as a fish most people know. Wash and scale within a few hours of catching them. Either eat them immediately, or flash freeze them, or smoke them. The cooked fish should not have any fishy smell. Maybe your dishes will, after sitting in the sink a couple of hours, but that's a different problem...

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

I think hugs from a hooker might be nicer than salad from McDonalds. Especially when the hugs are free and the salads aren't ;).

Not that I'm very experienced in this sort of thing[1] but many hookers seem quite nice, even if you tell them up front you're not "going with them" so as not to waste their time (you're there just to have a few drinks with friends), if it's a slow night they'll hang about and chat, etc. I'm sure there are the more mercenary ones who won't speak to you unless you give them money, but that's probably the same for many other professions too...

[1] FWIW, I'm still a virgin slashdotter :).

Re:And once again

[vux984]

On the plus side, not being able to smell can also be a killer feature: 15 minutes saved per day, not having to shower.

Only if you don't interact with people who still do have a sense of smell.

Re:And once again

[Rakarra]

The problem with this position is that the "gourmet" approach is often one and the same as the utilitarian approach. Many top chefs advocate "nose to tail" eating, where every part of the animal is used. They have no problems enjoying things that many people consider "gross" as delicacies.

Yeah. This is why I don't understand the objection people give me to eating hot dogs every once in awhile. "Do you know what they put in those things? It's got, like.. ground up hoofs and snouts and stuff." And my response is.. "Yeah... so? Is it going to kill me? Is it especially unhealthy compared to whatever else I might be eating? No? Then there's no problem."

Re:And once again

[Alamais]

Uh, no. I taste raw onions fine, I just find their effects unpleasant, and find interesting ways to replace them in recipes (or just do without). I can hear GWAR just fine, but I prefer not to get the fake blood all over my clothes.

You seem to believe that because I dislike one tiny facet of food, my opinion in other realms is worthless. Just because I taste things differently doesn't mean I'm "disabled"; the only thing it disqualifies me from commenting on is the UberOnion Surprise.

Re:And once again

[Sir_Lewk]

Whatever man, I make a seriously wicked bean salad :). Canned corn, vinegar, canned beans, those red things you find in olives which I always forget the name of...., little bit of olive oil, etc. Let it sit in the fridge overnight marinating in the vinegar, then serve chilled either straight or on corn chips. *salivates*

Unless you are living in a situation where affordable food is hard to come by and you don't know how you're going to feed your family the next day, I really really doubt that you don't value flavour as much as you may think. Everyone likes food that tastes good, vegans and beer guzzling carnivores alike. This "food is for nutrition, not taste!" nonsense is just pseudo-nerd macho-ism.

Also, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a good cheeseburger once in a while. Thankfully there is a good 5-Guys near enough to me that I never have to be caught in a mcdonalds. ;)

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdotter once again proving that they have no clue about the opposite gender.

Re:And once again

[ImNotAtWork]

mmm. Cabrito from San Antonio.

Re:And once again

[Johann Lau]

Ethics has nothing to do with it.

Bullshit... and that drives you nuts, apparently. Why?

Re:And once again

[Johann Lau]

It's something that the "ZOMG IT TAKES LIKE ELEVENTY MILLION KILOS OF GRAIN TO MAKE A KILO OF BEEF" crowd forget - a lot of what animals eat just comes back out. It gets turned into really really good fertiliser. Tonnes of it.

Nope, it's basic biology/phyics... every layer "sun to algae -> algae to bigger organisms -> etc." only passes on about 10% of the energy. So I guess that makes it the "knows some stuffs and doesn't suck at math" crowd...

Re:And once again

[bill_mcgonigle]

And the veggies ain't done unless you've added the salt pork, old world style.

This is how I learned to love turnip greens. I've convinced myself that I'm better off eating them this way than not at all.

Re:And once again

[artson]

"You can make compost from vegetable waste, but it's very time-consuming and because the cellulose is tough to break down it's not as good. Ruminant digestive systems break down cellulose, which is why cow dung is wet and splattery and horse dung is dry and fibrous. Stable manure doesn't rot down as well as byre manure, but they both rot down a lot better than just dead plants."

I make compost and it usually takes 45 to 60 days, depending on how much time I devote to turning the piles. Fast composting like this is an aerobic process and it generates a fair amount of heat, which breaks down the organic carbons in the pile (cellulose, lignin, tough plant material). Good compost is chock full of unbroken down plant material. It gives structure and holds water. I don't compost cow or horse manure. Cow manure isn't readily available and the horses around here are wormed monthly, which means the horse manure kills worms - oops. Here is what I do compost: kitchen wastes such as coffee grounds, tea leaves, egg shells, vegetable trimmings yard waste such as grass trimmings, leaves, chipped twigs saw dust and wood chips

Re:And once again

[thrawn_aj]

That's what I said. You're just quibbling over a matter of degree, which is amenable to individual variations. In my words, "a shitty tasting dish" is hardly something that's just missing a pinch of salt, it is the equivalent of what you called "something that is awful" - which will never pass muster no matter how prettied up (unless it's an avant garde food "connoisseur" like the ones punk'd in several episodes of 'Bullshit'). Of course a mediocre dish passes for good if dressed well enough, or if enough food critics fall for it. Many (probably not most) upscale restaurants base their entire business model on this =P.

Anyway, I don't see anything substantially wrong with your view so I have no counterarguments to offer, just the minor matter of degree above. Bon appetit.

Re:And once again

[artson]

"I really enjoy going to more upscale restaurants. I'd rather go somewhere nice once a month (or every other month even) than go to places like Applebee's every week. If you don't care about presentation then you might fall into the latter category."

I don't know about buddy's category, but I fall into the category of people who can rarely afford to dine in upscale restaurants. When I do, I expect certain things:

I expect to be put at ease.

I expect to be well served by knowledgeable people who believe it is up to them to wait, not me.

I expect to be fed sufficiently so that I don't have to feed myself either before or after I've dined expensively.

I expect the menu to be clear about what I'm getting, and if not, I expect the waiter to explain it clearly, without pretension.

I expect the waiter to mention that I'm a pretty big machine (two meters tall and 110 kilos) and that two ounce portions won't work.

I expect the chef to have a nodding acquaintance with good nutrition.

I expect good food, well presented in a sensible progression that leads to satisfaction.

When I order, I ask advice about the wine and the meal. I ask how it's prepared, portion size and about any nasty surprises, such as overly macho spicing. It is amazing to me how rarely the restaurant is successful, assuming their aim is to provide a good quality dining experience at a fair price and make me a return customer.

Re:And once again

[mjwx]

To be honest, I keep flirting with taking a contrarian position, and insisting that people should stop worrying about whether food tastes good, much less whether it looks good.

I disagree, Even in the third world you can go to so many places where a great emphasis is placed on not only the way food looks but the way it is presented. Asia is the ultimate expression of this, in Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam strong tasting food is favoured and always (in a restaurant) presented well. Even in the rural parts of Thailand food is presented well, bamboo mats with pots of noodles and curries, give me that same food in a cheap plastic bowl and it wouldn't taste the same (not just in my mind, plastic does not have the same insulating properties as as pewter).

that I sometimes wish people would just take a utilitarian attitude towards food.

Why do other people have to take a utilitarian attitude? Lead by example, eat oats and other staples alone and see how far you get. As for me, within 2 weeks I will be eating tasty, vibrant and healthy meals in a place where everything on my plate was grown or killed within 5 KM's of that plate (then I'll be travelling to the culinary black hole of Asia to help a friend throw a small gold ring into a god damned volcano).

Re:And once again

[mjwx]

Ironically, at the high end most of what prostitutes do a lot of chatting.

What high-end clients pay for may surprise you. For example, according to my ongoing interviews of several hundred sex workers, approximately 40 percent of trades in New York's sex economy fail to include a physical act beyond light petting or kissing. No intercourse, no oral stimulation, etc. That's one helluva conversation. But it's what many clients want. Flush with cash, these elite men routinely turn their prostitute into a second partner or spouse. Over the course of a year, they will sometimes persuade the woman to take on a new identity, replete with a fake name, a fake job, a fake life history, and so on. They may want to have sex or they may simply want to be treated like King for a Day.

Rich married men pay a lot for good company, if they want to get screwed they'll just transfer more assets into their wife's name.

In all seriousness, many men turn to prostitution for the Girl Friend Experience or GFE. This is all too common in places like Thailand and the Philippines where older men (picture late 30 and up), often divorcees just go to find one girl to spend a week or two with who is warm, kind and sensual. Then again the opposite is just as common, many men just go there to get laid as much as possible by as many ladies as possible. These guys are often divorcee's, there may be a pattern here.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

Shouldn't you be changing the cat's litter *before* the ammonia from their litter box starts to burn your eyes?! Maybe on a schedule or something? Just sayin'...

Re:And once again

[X0563511]

Red Snapper always smells that way. I've never tasted it. So, it's a rot fish eh? :D

Re:And once again

[vorpal22]

Hear, hear! People with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD - e.g. Crohn's Disease and Colitis) and many other bowel conditions have diets that defy our usual notion of health: as Crohn's sufferer, I must absolutely minimize my fibre intake, and in order to maintain a healthy weight and keep my strength and nutrition up, I must eat a high calorie diet rich in fats, carbohydrates, and sodium. It's not uncommon for me, for example, to sit down and eat an entire apple pie for lunch. Were I, though, to eat a hefty quantity of broccoli, I would be in excruciating agony and possibly end up hospitalized.

Imposing a universal idea of a healthy diet just doesn't work for many people: we all have unique nutritional needs and limitations.

Re:And once again

[Anonymous Coward]

What about foods like Durian? Smells pretty rancid but tastes delicious!

Re:And once again

[DarkKnightRadick]

Notice that I only used words like "many/most"

Re:And once again

[WNight]

The problem with this position is that the "gourmet" approach is often one and the same as the utilitarian approach.

There's a utilitarian approach that involves spending three times longer than required?

Spending tons of time preparing ox-tails for an ounce of meat isn't efficient, the true utilitarian way to use an entire animal is rendering it down. Jello is far more efficient (ick, ick, ick) than gourmet cooking.

So, it seems to me that the best way to accomplish your goal is actually to encourage the aesthetic, artistic, "gourmet" approach of the foodie, rather than rejecting our tastes.

Most people already eat with no concern for anything but their taste buds. How is encouraging that going to help them eat healthfully?

Re:And once again

[WNight]

As an insightful sibling comment mentioned, chefs take a much more reasoned approach to food. Proper portions, good taste, and proper balance of nutritional elements.

The chef I know is round. Butter is his main ingredient. It tastes quite good.

I rarely see food in a restaurant that makes me think anyone examined the ingredients at all (in a meal-planning sense.) What was it that one dish had, 7g of salt!? 35g of trans-fat.

When food takes a half hour to an hour to cook, then a lot more attention is paid to what food's purpose is, rather than pulling up to the drive through and having it handed to you.

Seems I'd have an extra 29 minutes to read the labels while you're working. And then that much more free time than you, every day.

I actually eat home-cooked meals mostly (almost exclusively) but resent the time spent cooking. It's not that any piece of it is terrible but that I have to do this or I won't eat, day in, day out. It's such a drag.

Implying that running around cleaning, chopping, cooking gives you a better understanding of what's in your food is silly. You may be more in touch with seasonal produce, but you still won't have any clue what it's good for unless you put the reading in.

Re:And once again

[WNight]

Presentation implies care was taken in preparing your food.

I've never worked in the food industry but my friends who have either have a very fatalistic attitude about eating out or cook their own meals...

I think the issue is that the food should come first, and be the only priority. If after you're done making it as good as possible you can also dress it up, then sure why not. But so many places go with looks instead of quality.

Re:And once again

[WNight]

This is known as the straw man.

No, you've gone out of your way to take his explanation, that you asked for, as if he's presenting it as a reason you must feel the same way.

It's called trolling.

No, it's not. Trolling isn't people with unpopular opinions not shutting up when you want.

He's not pretending not to understand you, he's not presenting his opinion as fact, he's not being intentionally misleading...

It seems perverse to me that you think people shouldn't treat themselves from time to time and eat food they like and enjoy themselves.

That's not what he said. He said "It's that I think food is intrinsically uninteresting". He's not saying people shouldn't enjoy themselves, but that he doesn't understand why they do it here specifically.

I find it perverse that people can play the spreadsheet known as World of Warcraft, slaughtering enough fluffy wamblers to unlock the next drudgery. Especially for those analogous with gluttons - the addicted players who can't comfortably leave.

That doesn't mean I don't understand enjoyment, just that I don't understand deriving it from that.

You equate this with gluttony, and I find this sad

It is associated. Food and gluttony. Foolish Owl didn't just make it up.

Go into a grocery store with a child, 99% of what they point to will not be good for them. It is sad.

Re:And once again

[WNight]

Words are primarily for communication and singing is possible without words. Yes, it's at least secondary and realistically it is unnecessary - look at everyone who doesn't do it. If it were necessary they wouldn't be alive.

And yeah, sex is for reproduction primarily. Performing it so much or in such a way as to cause problems equivalent to those gluttony causes would be perverse.

For me, the smell of sautéing onions and garlic is one of the simpler pleasures in life.

Sure, but that's because it's simple. If it took three hours to achieve it wouldn't be worth it.

Presumably you'd get bored of this eventually though, the OP has just gotten bored sooner than you.

Re:And once again

[WNight]

If it's bland, do you enjoy it?

I mean, you certainly would enjoy not eating something you dislike more, but why would you go out of your way to add a cut of fish whose primary characteristic is tastelessness when you could just leave it off?

Re:And once again

[WNight]

You got a lot of flack for this, but I agree.

I've got a good sense of taste, fine discriminatory senses, but I simply don't care as much about the pleasure of eating food as having sex, reading a good book, talking about something interesting, hiking, coding, etc. Going out to dinner, for me, is all about the company - the night won't be ruined even if the food isn't great.

If there was Hacker Chow (and it was healthful) I'd eat it 90% of the time, all the days I'm busy, or lazy, etc. As much fun as a great meal could be I don't want to have to stop what I'm doing three or more times a day and play gourmet simply to survive.

Re:And once again

[WNight]

You are obviously someone who has never had a good meal in his life.

There's no such thing as a meal good enough to warrant 1/16th of my waking life. (1 hour cooking/eating per day, a low estimate.)

Given the choice between some good labor intensive peasant food (I'm Polish) and "utilitarian food," I'm going to be loading the plate up with some pierogis thanks.

Yes, and so would I. But would you spend the time to make it, on a regular basis? I doubt it...

It's only when you can ignore the labor that you can say that.

Saying that eating should only be for nutrition is like saying sex should only be for reproduction. I reject your outlook. It is without enjoyment. It is spartan for the sole reason of utility. It is a dour, rainy day in late November.

Are you sure he's not saving the time for better things? I know what I'd want to be doing on a dour late-November day and it's not cooking...

Perfect temperature

[Mononoke]

Many signature dishes come out at the perfect temperature

No they don't. Get over yourselves.

Re:Perfect temperature

[Anonymous Coward]

True. This is a load of gibberish. When you have a table of 4, with 4 different entrees, do you really think the chef/cook/etc got it perfectly right so as to have all 4 entrees (and sides) done at the perfect temperature simultaneously? Really?

No, three of them sat under a heat lamp for a minute, two, or five, while the last entree (and accompaniments) were getting finished.

Writer has never worked in a restaurant kitchen.

Re:Perfect temperature

[T Murphy]

RTFA:

Take the diner who recently ordered a signature dish, Hot Potato-Cold Potato, in which a marble-sized sphere of piping hot Yukon Gold is dropped into a bowl of 40-degree potato soup at the pull of a pin. Eating it at the proper temperature is key to the experience.

Desserts with something fresh out of the oven and ice cream on top are similar- wait even 5 minutes and the melting ice cream hurts the taste and texture noticeably. Now, if they were talking about typical dishes without built-in temperature differences, I might agree with you.

Re:Perfect temperature

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right.
Even Italian dishes like risotto and pasta (which if properly cooked, come out at the right state of doneness (al dente) and are served immediately) don't suffer too much if left out a few minutes. It's only when they've been allowed to cool for more than 7-10 minutes that they start to be suboptimal.

The problem is with those crazy food bloggers who take more than 10 minutes to frame a shot with their tripods etc. Most food bloggers I know spend 1-2 minutes per 20 pictures or so.

Re:Perfect temperature

[Arker]

Even if they did, they are expected to hold their taste long enough for them to be, you know, eaten?

Which, if you do it right, can take some time. Divide into bite-sized portions, not too big, convey to mouth, chew *thoroughly*, then and only then swallow. Then take a sip of your drink, probably engage in conversation for a minute, before repeating.

If taking a minute at the beginning of the meal to take pictures degrades the taste, then the taste will be degraded horribly by the time the diner finishes the plate. And people who take a moment to close their eyes and thank $deity for their food would be ruining it too. It's a bunch of nonsense.

Flash photography can be distracting and annoying, however.

Re:Perfect temperature

[discord5]

Many signature dishes come out at the perfect temperature

No they don't. Get over yourselves.

You sir, obviously haven't experienced the finer art of cooking. Last week I made a lasagna that needed to be served at the perfect temperature in order to be optimally satisfying. It needed to be so hot that it would scorch the taste buds right off of your tongue, or else you would be unable to stand the taste.

DE-LI-CIOUS! Hmmm. Nothing beats homemade cooking.

Re:Perfect temperature

[Anonymous Coward]

I always though geeks were into cooking? First impressions matter. The first bite cements a flavor memory, that sticks with you as your food cools. Miss the window of opportunity and a great dish just becomes good or even meh. This is also why good food is generally served in small portions. Its like your first sip of coffee in the morning, if you waited tell it was cold or left it in the pot to burn you might just spit it out. But if you had a few drinks before waiting tell its past its prime you might just finish off that last gulp or two without any problem. Same thing.

Re:Perfect temperature

[FoolishOwl]

In fairness, the article cited a particular dish, called "Hot Potato-Cold Potato," for which the temperature was critical.

However, I can't imagine this being an issue at any restaurant that I've ever eaten. The perfect temperature? Customers taking twenty photos of their meal? Who are these people, and what is wrong with them?

Re:Perfect temperature

[Anonymous Coward]

People are weird as hell.

No exceptions.

Re:Perfect temperature

[Anonymous Coward]

Look, just because all you personally ever eat comes out of a microwave, in a bag, or from the hands of a greasy fast food drone...

Re:Perfect temperature

[wjc_25]

RTFA. Setting up and using a tripod takes more than a minute. The problem isn't just clicking a button on a cell camera - the problem is setting up equipment to get the "perfect shot" of the food at the expense of actually enjoying it.

Re:Perfect temperature

[Message]

That explains why all those gourmet meals have such small portions! You have to eat it quickly.

Re:Perfect temperature

[Anonymous Coward]

Snobs who eat things like the above mentioned dish and call it "an experience" are assholes and the world would probably be a better place if they didn't have a blog.

Re:Perfect temperature

[techno-vampire]

Writer has never worked in a restaurant kitchen.

Obviously. First, a good restaurant chef will time things so that they get done as close to each other as possible. Second, some of the dishes will come off of the stove or out of the oven a bit hotter than the perfect temperature and need a minute or two to cool down; generally, those are plated first, so that by the time everything else is done, they're Just Right.

Re:Perfect temperature

[CheshireCatCO]

Anyone setting up a tripod gets what they deserve, although I don't see why it causes the food to be colder. It's not like you can't have the tripod ready to go before the food shows up. (And tripods are really what's slowing people down, then banning flashes is the opposite of what you want to do. Ban the tripods instead, they're probably a menace to navigation between tables anyway.)

Frankly the whole article smells of creating journalism out of a weak, rare concern. I've never noticed anyone else taking pictures of their food in a restaurant, which suggests that few people are really doing it, or that most of them are quick and discrete.

Re:Perfect temperature

[ChipMonk]

Parent is modded funny (and I think that was discord5's intention), but some people like myself have a low threshold of heat pain. I've taken crotch shots, broken bones, and blinding headaches, and come away mostly none the worse for wear. Anything above 115 deg F, however, is too hot for me to touch, let alone eat, and I reflexively recoil from it. "Fresh off the grill" is best served on room-temperature bread, with recently refrigerated condiments. And as much as I like Mexican food (well, most any food, ethnic or otherwise), the typical Mexican restaurant chicken fajita has to sit at least 5 minutes before I can even consider taking a bite.

WRT TFA, that's plenty of time to set up a camera and tripod. I'm not going to complain, if I eat food that is at a temperature the cook/chef isn't hot enough. I know my taste buds, and general tastes, better than the cook does.

Re:Perfect temperature

[drsmithy]

If taking a minute at the beginning of the meal to take pictures degrades the taste, then the taste will be degraded horribly by the time the diner finishes the plate.

The thing is, in restaurants expensive enough to be visited by people who review food, you barely get more than a few bites worth of food on your plate to start with.

Re:Perfect temperature

[Culture20]

Many signature dishes come out at the perfect temperature

No they don't. Get over yourselves.

It's the whole idea behind the McDLT.

Re:Perfect temperature

[ozbird]

The obvious solution is to have blogging and non-blogging sections of the restaurant, and adjust the food temperatures accordingly. I'd much rather my food come out too warm and need to cool a little that "perfect": eating at a fine restaurant is generally done with company, and talking is often the real main course. "Shut up, and eat it before it gets cold" is what I'd expect from my mother, not a fine restaurant.

Re:Perfect temperature

[sjwt]

Same hear, I call this the "not killing your mouth and taste buds with scalding hot coffee day in and out efect"

Re:Perfect temperature

[sjwt]

And herein lies the 'myth' of 'resting' a steak. Fuck I hate places that serve an apparently 'rested' stake, which is just a bad cover up for a cold stake.

Re:Perfect temperature

[zippthorne]

Look, if you think $12 a plate (e.g. Applebees) is high end, you're not going to the kind of restaurant where timing is critical (although applebees does still make an attempt to come out at the same time...). Not coincidentally, you're also not going to the kind of restaurant where people would consider taking a picture of the food.

Re:Perfect temperature

[LynnwoodRooster]

You work at my local Domino's Pizza too, right?

Re:Perfect temperature

[X0563511]

I'm similar, but the pain threshold takes time to 'set'

I can burn myself and not even realize it, while at the same time I can hold a cup of coffee in my hand and go "OUCH OUCH OUCH OUCH HOT"

Re:Perfect temperature

[Anonymous Coward]

"Shut up, and eat it before it gets cold" is what I'd expect from my mother, not a fine restaurant.

I see you've never been to Olive Garden?
Oh wait, I didn't read the part about 'fine restaurant'.

Re:Perfect temperature

[forkazoo]

Desserts with something fresh out of the oven and ice cream on top are similar- wait even 5 minutes and the melting ice cream hurts the taste and texture noticeably. Now, if they were talking about typical dishes without built-in temperature differences, I might agree with you.

Crispy things with a sauce on top often get soggy after a while. The more time you spend not eating it, the more likely that it will be soggy by the time you finally get around to it.

Re:Perfect temperature

[Anonymous Coward]

The specific dish mentioned in the article, Alinea's "Hot Potato Cold Potato," is always served to the entire table at once as part of a 12 or 24 course tasting menu.

Parent has never dined at a Michelin 3-star restaurant.

Re:Perfect temperature

[snowgirl]

Serious Foods: RE: Resting a Steak

Presented to you is actual photographic evidence for the reason for "resting a steak".

Now, to point, if you rest a steak and the person gets it cold, then they fucked up. Using the argument of "resting a steak" is not a proper reason for a cold steak.

Rather the myth should be that resting a steak means letting it go cold. This later one would be the mark of a bad chef.

Re:Perfect temperature

[dangitman]

Not coincidentally, you're also not going to the kind of restaurant where people would consider taking a picture of the food.

Oh really? There are plenty of places on this wild world web that revel in taking photos of bad food from shitty restaurants or discussing bad food photography.

Re:Perfect temperature

[T Murphy]

Don't go hating on Applebee's, they're an amazing resource. If anyone says you're a bad cook, take them out to Applebee's and they'll never think poorly of your cooking again.

Re:Perfect temperature

[T Murphy]

To be fair, if a dish is taste, texture, smell, sight... what word other than "experience" sums that up nicely? I understand using "experience" the same way tourism commercials do would be snobbish and silly, but used properly I'm afraid there's no good substitute when talking about food.

Re:Perfect temperature

[oji-sama]

Parent is modded funny (and I think that was discord5's intention), but some people like myself have a low threshold of heat pain. I've taken crotch shots, broken bones, and blinding headaches, and come away mostly none the worse for wear.

Are you sure you're following instructions properly when cooking?

Re:Perfect temperature

[kramerd]

You want me to waste $12 on someone who thinks I'm a bad cook?

Re:Perfect temperature

[dzfoo]

In all fairness, Hell is not weird. It's kind of nice once you get used to the heat. Plus the chicks are incredible!

      -dZ.

Re:Perfect temperature

[Anonymous Coward]

Presented to you is actual photographic evidence for the reason for "resting a steak".

What's in there might be actual photographic evidence that people have different tastes. That would only seem to apply to meat that simply isn't cooked enough. I *hate* medium-rare steaks. Medium-well is the minimum cooking a steak would need, but I'd prefer mine well-done.

Yeah, yeah. A whole lot of people are going to start replying on how I'm killing the taste of the meat. I don't like that raw taste you seem to like, and I want to kill it. Resting a stake seems to increase that flavor, based on your evidence.

Not everyone agrees with your tastes. Get over it.

Re:Perfect temperature

[troll8901]

I always though geeks were into cooking?

Obviously, sir, you watch too much television, of the variety "geek becomes highly desirable - once the girl gets to know the guy".

Re:Perfect temperature

[hey!]

Ok maybe so, but what is snobbish about a souffle? They're amazing right out of the oven but turn into a rubbery omelet ten minutes later. They aren't complicated to make; I taught my elementary school kids to make them. The reason many people have never had them is because timing is critical. You can't keep them under a heat lamp.

Or take pizza. Most of us are accustomed to eating lukewarm pizza, but it really is much better right out of the oven.

Ever eat gravy on a slice of roast beef? Isn't hot gravy much better than room temperature gravy? Gravy, by the way, is a sauce, and many sauces, particularly the fat based ones, go from wonderful at serving temperature to nasty at room temperature.

Re:Perfect temperature

[snowgirl]

Presented to you is actual photographic evidence for the reason for "resting a steak".

What's in there might be actual photographic evidence that people have different tastes. That would only seem to apply to meat that simply isn't cooked enough. I *hate* medium-rare steaks. Medium-well is the minimum cooking a steak would need, but I'd prefer mine well-done.

Yeah, yeah. A whole lot of people are going to start replying on how I'm killing the taste of the meat. I don't like that raw taste you seem to like, and I want to kill it. Resting a stake seems to increase that flavor, based on your evidence.

Not everyone agrees with your tastes. Get over it.

I would never argue that you are killing the taste of the steak. If you like your meat well-done, then by Thor, you want it well-done!

Taste is opinion. Period.

But the person I responded to replied that there is no reason to rest a steak, to which I provided evidence that there is a proper scientifically verifiable reason to resting a steak.*

I also pointed out though, that if a steak is cold when you get it; it should never be because it was rested. If one is leaving a steak out until it is cold, then this is not "resting"... this is simply being a bad chef.

To wit, if you're in a restaurant, feel free to order a steak well-done with no resting. Most chefs already understand the idea of cooking to order.

* Unlike searing a steak to "seal in the juices". It's been scientifically proven that searing a steak actually decreases the moisture content at the end.

Re:Perfect temperature

[ImNotAtWork]

http://www.greasefreak.com/

Re:Perfect temperature

[soppsa]

You and I clearly do not dine at the same caliber of restaurants...

Re:Perfect temperature

[zippthorne]

Applebee's isn't bad food. They're just not fine dining, and one of the less expensive kinda-boring chain restaurants. The only thing I can say they do really wrong is ribs, which for some reason, they cut across the bone to give you lots of sharp bony bits to bite into.

It's just that their fare is just that: ribs, hamburgers, poor cuts of meat they've cooked the hell out of for safety, fajitas, etc. Easy, cheap food. I'll take them over McDonald's if, say, I'm traveling and there's no other choice in the sleepy truck-stop town I have to pause in to avoid falling asleep on the road.

Boy oh boy!

[DigitAl56K]

This story looks magnificent, I love the arrangement of the words and the punctuation! Hang on while I read it... ... meh...

Re:Boy oh boy!

[jjoelc]

poor analogy.. typography and graphic artist geeks will be glad to point out why.

Re:Boy oh boy!

[e9th]

Remember, the story sat in the Firehose for over two hours before you read it.

Re:Boy oh boy!

[ColdWetDog]

Well that explains the smell....

Re:Boy oh boy!

[Anonymous Coward]

Seen on Slashdot:
"Sir, your analogy was exceedingly poor. Please pay attention to this typography specialist who will explain to you why."

Disturbing the other guests

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps the real problem is that all the flash lights disturb the other guests in the restaurant.

Re:Disturbing the other guests

[stephanruby]

You've read the article! That's completely uncool. You're ruining it for the rest of us. Next time, please include a ***SPOILER*** alert in your comment.

Re:Disturbing the other guests

[History's Coming To]

A good few places (in the UK at least) have "dining in the dark" nights where everything is blacked out. It's supposed to highlight your other senses.

Re:Disturbing the other guests

[Trepidity]

Yeah, I'd be pretty annoyed if I were at some high end-restaurant and someone next to me was setting up a tripod with flash to photograph his food. Taking a photo with your iPhone or whatever is fine, if a bit gauche, but setting up a whole production isn't really something people with decent manners should do in someone else's establishment, at least unless they've cleared it ahead of time.

Re:Disturbing the other guests

[MoeDumb]

Come July you won't even need a flashbulb -- seriously. According to technology writer David Pogue in today's NY Times, Sony will be releasing a breakthrough pocket camera called the NEX-5 Alpha: SLR quality pictures and no flash required in low light situations. http://tinyurl.com/2eyn5tu

Re:Disturbing the other guests

[Anonymous Coward]

You've read the article! That's completely uncool. You're ruining it for the rest of us. Next time, please include a ***SPOILER*** alert in your comment.

So, how did you know he read the article?

Re:Disturbing the other guests

[E IS mC(Square)]

Any reference to David Pogue and you lose all your credibility of talking about any gadget.

Re:Disturbing the other guests

[stephanruby]

So, how did you know he read the article?

The same way I know you read it too. My body excretes billions of air-floating nano-particules that are capable of video-recording and re-broadcasting back everything they see in (almost) Real Time.

Re:Disturbing the other guests

[Lunzo]

Not exactly new news. Flashbulbs have been going off in restaurants and spoiling the ambiance since the invention of 35mm film. I guess it's more annoying these days because so many more people have cameras.

Re:Disturbing the other guests

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a giant customized Starbucks in Cupertino California which has also established a 'no flash' rule.

Minutes?

[shoemakc]

...a few minutes? What is this, the 1840's?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_photography

Re:Minutes?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they are bloggers from 2010.

Re:Minutes?

[game kid]

Dude. High dynamic range entrées take time.

Re:Minutes?

[BillX]

Especially now that they are banning flash...the shot will take longer still, AND the waiter gets to trip over tripods.

People really do this?

[theJML]

I don't know about anyone else, but when I have to wait at a restaurant to get seated and then wait for food, the only thing on my mind when that food appears is eating it. Sure I'll talk about how good it tastes and how great it looks, but that's gonna happen while eating it. I'm not going to go "Sweet! That's EXACTLY what I wanted and I'm starving, oh it smells so good I'm just going to whip out my iPhone and start blogging about it." No, I'm hungry gosh darn it, GET IN MY BELLY!

Re:People really do this?

[MonTemplar]

Agreed. The only time I'd use my phone whilst in a restaurant would be a) to take a photo if it's a birthday party or celebration, or b) if there was really bad service or standards of hygiene, and I wanted proof to back it up when I reported it. Ok, technically there's also c) to take a call, but I would either switch the phone off or put it on silent or vibrate, to avoid pissing off everyone around me.

-MT.

Re:People really do this?

[Kjella]

I get that often, but that's for when I just chow something down at a cheap place or at home or a fastfood joint. If I go to an expensive restaurant, I don't go there that hungry. For one the portions are rarely that big, secondly what's the point of blowing the cash if it'll barely touch your taste buds on the way down? Had to do that recently because of a misunderstanding so we had to leave early, what a waste of delicious beef when I barely got more enjoyment out of it than a trip to Burger King. At least I wasn't the one paying or I'd be really annoyed...

Re:People really do this?

[vadim_t]

I've taken photos of my food twice: Once when I thought it'd be something spectacularly large, and once when trying to capture the preparation of "fireball icecream". I think it makes sense to give it a try when you think it's going to be something memorable. It took me maybe 30 seconds both times.

But it never occured to me to actually set up a tripod at a restaurant. It just seems like an awkward thing to do, especially in a place where somebody else could run into it. Besides being an inconsiderate thing to do, high end camera equipment and food don't mix very well, and restaurants have a lot of it.

Re:People really do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously don't understand the mind of a true blogger, they have to blog about everything they do.

Credo: "I blog, therefore I am."

Re:People really do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

My family's ideal dinner is a stop at a IHOP or maybe one of the Chilis, Uno, Firdays, clones. It is quick, consistent, and good food for a good price. I know some people like to be catered and like to be tended to by the "servants" and even like the experience of spending a lot of money and thinking they are in some theoretical higher class of people. For us, we see it as paying a lot more, waiting a lot longer, and for most people (even if you won't admit it) have to act like you are someone else to fit into the role. My co workers and I go out all of the time for lunch, Subway, Jacks corner grill, some pizza joint etc. We have a good time and we are ourselves. Occasionally we go to a nice expensive steak house in our building. Everyone puts napkins on their lap, eats the salad with the salad fork, excuses themselves from the table etc.. If you are into putting a napkin on your lap fine, but why not do it when you are eating at the pizza place or subway as well? I did not see someone eating their salad first at the pizza place. It is part of the act. Oddly, we pay much more for the steak which is good but the service is not much better (as defined by getting what we needed and wanted in a timely manner), and the wait and the time when we were donw until the bill was paid and we walked out was MUCH longer.

Is that the price to pay to feel elite? If it was just about the "food" I could understand but often times it's not, must of the expense in the atmosphere the restaurant created. Some of the best and memorable food I've eaten was not at an "expensive" restaurant.

Re:People really do this?

[dangitman]

You don't understand yet? We are living in the age of the blogger, the twitterer, the ultimate narcissist. To these people, their every bowel movement is a significant event that deserves public attention. In their minds, taking a photo of their food is something that might earn them a Pulitzer Prize, and the adoration of millions.

Re:People really do this?

[shutdown -p now]

I do occasionally take snap pics of food as it's served when it looks particularly good and smells delicious, and I suspect that I might be recommending the place to friends due to that - a picture is worth a thousand words etc.

Of course, this is just swipe out the phone, point & click, hide it - literally a few seconds. Not some elaborate setup to get the right angle, lighting etc, which is what TFA seems to be about.

Re:People really do this?

[snowgirl]

Agreed. The only time I'd use my phone whilst in a restaurant would be a) to take a photo if it's a birthday party or celebration, or b) if there was really bad service or standards of hygiene, and I wanted proof to back it up when I reported it. Ok, technically there's also c) to take a call, but I would either switch the phone off or put it on silent or vibrate, to avoid pissing off everyone around me.

-MT.

Or d) a dish served in such a presentation that it is an edible piece of art.

This rarely occurs outside of fine dinning, though. Even then, presentation is not normally at the super artistic level of "I need to photograph this!"

Food artists handle preparing food for being photographed. What looks good when it is presented right before you will not always look good on camera. Same issues as with people having their picture taken.

Chefs at a restaurant are not typically preparing food to be photographed, rather they are preparing food to be admired shortly prior to being consumed.

Re:People really do this?

[Le Marteau]

You remind me of the people who hate classical music, and think that everyone who listens to classical music is just trying to impress other people.

You obviously have no clue about the appeal of fine dining. That's OK. But spare me the attitude that just because you have no appreciation for such things, that everyone else who does is somehow a fake.

Re:People really do this?

[bill_mcgonigle]

This rarely occurs outside of fine dinning, though. Even then, presentation is not normally at the super artistic level of "I need to photograph this!"

Easy fix - take the zucchini wedge, poke four holes in it with the fork tines. Place a broccoli flower in two holes for eyes, use the ends of parsley for antennae. Place the 'slug' on your entree and photograph with your almost-useless-in-low-light-cmos cameraphone. Uploading to social networking sites with geocoding entirely optional.

Re:People really do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure where you typically eat, but I live in NY and we have some spectacular restaurants where how the food is served is a work of art in itself (this tends to be especially true at Sushi restaurants).

Then again, I just take a quick snap with a camera phone to remember how good the meal was, or because it was exotic. If you are taking so long that your meal is getting cold... you probably need to learn how to use your camera better or just not take the photography so seriously- restaurant reviews have been quite popular for some time without taking pictures of the food with cameras.

New /. section?

[jdawg]

Anxiously awaiting food.slashdot.org.

And the incessant whining from RMS about restaurants that don't publish their recipes.

Re:New /. section?

[dmitriy88]

i don't understand why this is on /. either...

Re:New /. section?

[Anonymous Coward]

iDon't either ...

Re:New /. section?

[Adambomb]

I have altered the soup. Pray I don't alter it any further.

Re:New /. section?

[Xtifr]

The word "blogger" tripped their acceptance regex. (:

Re:New /. section?

[FoolishOwl]

Now there's a comment that belongs on Slashdot.

Re:New /. section?

[ChipMonk]

Well, they do publish their ingredients, at least in the USA. They have to, for people with food allergies.

As for the actual preparations, well, nobody will stop you from reverse-engineering them. After all, that's the Open Source way.

Re:New /. section?

[discord5]

Anxiously awaiting food.slashdot.org.

And the incessant whining from RMS about restaurants that don't publish their recipes.

For some reason I don't see the term "open sauce" catching on that well. On the upside, I don't think food can be cucumbered by patents.

Re:New /. section?

[Anonymous Coward]

From ESR's jargon file:

http://catb.org/jargon/html/p-convention.html

[Once, when we were at a Chinese restaurant, Bill Gosper wanted to know whether someone would like to share with him a two-person-sized bowl of soup. His inquiry was: “Split-p soup?” — GLS]

Re:New /. section?

[shadowbearer]

[Elsewhere]

  I sense a great disturbance in the food. As if millions of diners salivated in ecstasy, then were suddenly tasteless. I fear something terrible has happened.

Re:New /. section?

[Nimey]

Brilliant.

Re:New /. section?

[cyberzephyr]

i don't understand why this is on /. either...

I can say for one it's for a /. person like me, a professional chef (20yrs) who is also a semi-pro photographer(15yrs) as well as a computer tech.

I would not get upset with someone taking pictures but a tripod is a no no. People might trip and my restaurant could get sued.

I'm not Grant Achatz but i have eaten at Alinea and see his point but there is really nothing you can do but restrict tripods IMO.

When a waitperson tells me someone liked my food so much they took a picture i give them a little something extra (what we chefs call an

"Amuse") for the compliment they gave me.

Re:New /. section?

[Anonymous Coward]

+ Bacon.

Re:New /. section?

[Anonymous Coward]

I fear something terrible has happened.

No soup for you!

Re:New /. section?

[Hurricane78]

Considering the average weight of a geek, food definitely is “the other thing that he likes very much”. :)

Then again, considering his food mainly consists of (forgive my lack of knowledge about US trash “food”) pop tarts and pizza... ;)

But I already thought: Why is there not a /.-like site for all areas of expertise? One for cooks. One for artists. One for porn stars... (no, you’re not allowed there!). Whatever. :)

Re:New /. section?

[bushing]

I hear RMS is a big fan of borscht: http://www.mefeedia.com/watch/26124889

Re:New /. section?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you might be confused about what open source is about...

Re:New /. section?

[TheRaven64]

The really good ones do. I am very fortunate that the closest restaurant to my house is in the Good Food Guide and reasonably priced (not cheap, but I never feel like I didn't get at least what I paid for). They buy mostly local produce and the chef create recipes to fit whatever is available fresh. If I like something, he's happy to explain how it's made. I'm not going there because of the recipes, I'm going there because of his skill. Part of that skill is thinking of the recipe, but only a small part. A bigger part is selecting which are appropriate for the available ingredients (fresh ingredients make a big difference to the quality of the food, and you want to design the menu to take advantage of this) and even the weather (you want to eat different things when it's raining and when it's sunny). The biggest part is his skill at preparation.

I'm a reasonably good cook, and I can often eat something in a slightly less-good restaurant and then reproduce it at home, but even with his explanation I can't get more than a vague imitation of some of his better dishes. Oh, and even the 'build process' is open source. The restaurant is upside down, with the eating part upstairs and the kitchen downstairs with a big window on the kitchen, so anyone can stand outside and watch the cooking.

Re:New /. section?

[Hognoxious]

The soup is a lie.

Re:New /. section?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where is this survey the records the weight of geeks and compares them to the rest of the population?

Re:New /. section?

[CmdrPorno]

Perhaps you were looking for:
http://www.slashfood.com/ ...which is an actual website about food, but not affiliated with Slashdot, AFAIK.

Re:New /. section?

[dmomo]

You cannot have a hot new site without cliches. So, I offer: ETFE (eat the fucking entree)

Re:New /. section?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and we should stop listing the ingredients on food products too. After all, it's a trade secret.

Re:New /. section?

[Anonymous Coward]

Anxiously awaiting food.slashdot.org.

And the incessant whining from RMS about restaurants that don't publish their recipes.

or you could just go to http://slashfood.com ;)

Re:New /. section?

[mjwx]

As for the actual preparations, well, nobody will stop you from reverse-engineering them. After all, that's the Open Source way.

Actually, it's called the open sauce movement.

Tacky?

[CodeNameSly]

Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but whipping out your camera at a nice restaurant seems decidedly tacky. Flashes could also disturb fellow diners.

Re:Tacky?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I would be against the flash, that would only annoy those around you. It's possible to take good pictures without flash, and take pictures pretty quickly. I suggest that food bloggers learn how to not use flash, for one, for the annoyance, another, flash distorts the appearance of the surroundings with light that's only there for a fraction of a second, it's not the restaurant's normal lighting. It helps to learn how to be discrete too. Have the camera set up already, when no one is looking, take it out of the bag, snap a few quick shots and put it away before anyone notices.

Re:Tacky?

[Trepidity]

It sounds like some of the photographers in question are avoiding flash by setting up tripods, which somehow also seems pretty tacky to do in a restaurant, at least unless you're an official photographer brought in by the restaurant.

Re:Tacky?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I would be against the tripods too, tripods distract from the atmosphere and are pretty disruptive in close quarters.

Re:Tacky?

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? I suggest you try your suggestions. No flash...sure, I absolutely never use flash. But if you don't have flash, and you're inside, you're getting less than optimum lighting and you need a longer exposure. And a tripod. And there goes quick and discrete.

But...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're not supposed to do any cooking when you have open sores.

You are all missing the point.

[Organic Brain Damage]

Food bloggers are simply braggarts. "Look at me and the wonderful food I'm enjoying! Aren't I just precious?" This is the sub-text of almost every food blog. It's even more obnoxious than disturbing the fellow diners.

Re:You are all missing the point.

[Anonymous Coward]

That could be said of bloggers in general. I'm interested in the opinions of experts and scholars, not the average person. The ease of entry into blogging is what puts it at the forefront of the common man information revolution, or whatever. But I'm not interested in the facile/banal musings of halfwits with the delusion of insight.

Of course, I'm putting my opinion out there right now... but I haven't put it out in my own, ostensibly unique little forum, as though I'm some formidable intellectual force.

Re:You are all missing the point.

[snowgirl]

Food bloggers are simply braggarts. "Look at me and the wonderful food I'm enjoying! Aren't I just precious?" This is the sub-text of almost every food blog. It's even more obnoxious than disturbing the fellow diners.

I'm a future culinary arts student. I'm kind of torn in some ways, in that I don't want to be an arrogant pretentious bitch about food... but when I taste my roommate's cooking, there just isn't the same level of dedication to the taste as with my own dishes.

Sure, I fuck things up here and there (I am still learning after all), but generally my roommates produce bland dishes, or have processed food that only has taste because they've over salted it, over sweetened it, or whatever.

Re:You are all missing the point.

[Sensei Eggwoah]

Stop worrying about it. If you take a deep interest in any topic that can be evaluated in a subjective manner, someone is going to find you pretentious. There are much more important things to worry about.

Re:You are all missing the point.

[dzfoo]

Wait, do you seriously blog about how your roommate's cooking is not as good as yours, mostly because of your "level of dedication", being a culinary arts student?

Talk about braggarts and pretentious pricks.

        -dZ.

Re:You are all missing the point.

[snowgirl]

Wait, do you seriously blog about how your roommate's cooking is not as good as yours, mostly because of your "level of dedication", being a culinary arts student?

No, I do not blog about my roommate's cooking. But I do blog about what I have cooked.

Re:You are all missing the point.

[Backward Z]

I agree wholeheartedly.

Whenever I see pictures of meals people bought in a restaurant in my Facebook feed, my eyes they start-a-rolling.

It's the same thing as when people make these status updates along the lines of, "OMG my life is so awesome! I love my life!" They might as well be saying, "Your life isn't as good as mine."

Just... stfu already, people.

Re:You are all missing the point.

[Anonymous Coward]

When are you going to take the "taste is a subjective thing" course?

Seriously, the level of salt or sugar a person prefers will of course vary. Ever heard the phrase add x to taste?

To do it right

[mrmeval]

If you're going to go clandestine go and eat and take copious notes. Then setup a photo shoot with the restaurant of what you had. You will have the time to set up your photographic equipment correctly and take good photos not some spur of the moment flash crap that makes the stuff look like roast corpse.

If you're not going to go clandestine set up a private room and explain who you are and why you're coming. Most TV stations do this. Most of the reviews I've seen the most effort expended on are the positive ones. And by chance the positive ones are the ones I want to read. I want a score for the bad ones so I can avoid them.

I would not take a camera to a little Mexican hole in the wall I know as the patrons might complain but I fully plan on taking pictures of the food and the new add on they're making when they scrape up enough money to complete it. I'm sure the owner will allow a private photo shoot. The owner is at least a 3 star chef, the food is not cheap and the way he makes it is better than any so called Mexican restaurant within 50 miles. There are a few true Mexican restaurants in town but not even those compare to this gem.

Re:To do it right

[WNight]

You will have the time to set up your photographic equipment correctly and take good photos not some spur of the moment flash crap

You do know that the settings the camera comes up with aren't random, right? If you know what you want it doesn't take much time to get a good shot.

that makes the stuff look like roast corpse.

You're eating meat, what should it look like? A fun frolicking lamb?

I would not take a camera to a little Mexican hole in the wall I know as the patrons might complain

Wah. I've seen people complain about breastfeeding near them, I didn't give their opinion any weight there either.

People act like food pictures are all going to include the other diners... Most food pictures I see are of a plate, on a table, with food on it. People are hardly ever in the photos.

If you're not going to go clandestine set up a private room and explain who you are and why you're coming.

Oh yeah, that way you'll get exactly the same service/food as anyone else. Review fail.

Once the blogger has their food they don't need to hide their purpose and thus can take pictures after food delivery.

Food blogging in a different form

[Petersko]

Slightly offtopic, but I use the Urban Spoon app a lot. In general I don't trust any individual food bloggers. It's impossible to know which twits ordered something they probably wouldn't like but wanted to try, and then blogged about how they didn't like it. Or the waitress didn't respond to their "Are you from Tennessee?" pickup line and they feel slighted. Or they just like to bitch. Or they just don't like the race of the proprietor.

So I've begun to trust the raw number. 87% of people liked it out of 150 reviews? I'm in.

Found an awesome vietnamese place the other day that way, minutes from my home. I've been ordering Bun Bo Hue for a couple of decades, and this lady was the first person to good-naturedly) correct me. It's pronounced "huay", not "hew". They were all laughing at me, I just know it.

Re:Food blogging in a different form

[HungWeiLo]

I'm not sure about using raw numbers either - it's highly dependent on where you live. Urbanspoon gives 81% for Olive Garden in Tacoma, WA.

Re:Food blogging in a different form

[linzeal]

Here in PDX it is a pretty reliable metric. The burbs rate chains higher on things like cleanliness (code for the only Mexicans we could see were the waiters) and as you get to the inner city you start seeing people that actually sound like they know what they are talking about.

Re:Food blogging in a different form

[WNight]

In general I don't trust any individual food bloggers. [...] Or they just like to bitch. Or they just don't like the race of the proprietor.

So read their words. If they say the food arrived cold it probably did. Make your own judgments. I'd forgive cold food if they dealt with it properly, but I wouldn't tolerate mixing up orders and blaming the customer. Just my own peeves.

It's the numbers I don't trust. By that standard one person who either wants to reward his friend's restaurant, or who got short-changed at the till and wants revenge, has the same weight as someone who makes a detailed examination of the food/service.

U live in co?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not exactly a food Mecca. Ate at the publican tonight in Chicago... At least 2 ppl brought nice cameras Into the joint. It hAppens a lot. Moto has it even worse as does any molecular gAstronomy joint.

Re:U live in co?

[X0563511]

Shut the fuck up, and come back after you learn how to use complete words and sentences.

Re:U live in co?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, your (poorly written) response to someone posting from Colorado is to claim that Chicago is a food Mecca? Having eaten there (among other far better cities for dining), I call bullshit. It's like most big cities: the exact same array of restaurants ranging from crappy (common) to good (uncommon and usually not the famous ones). Chicago isn't really any different from Denver in terms of being a gastronomic center. Sorry to deflate your ego, but you're a far cry form Paris.

Also, just because someone lives in Colorado, it doesn't follow that she never travels. For all you know, the grandparent was dining with you in Chicago tonight. "You live in X, so you can't know anything," is a pretty weak argument.

Re:U live in co?

[Anonymous Coward]

iphone much?

Sounds like an epidemic

[auLucifer]

But is it really that bad? Maybe it just hasn't caught on in little Brisbane, Australia and I'm missing the point as to why it's front page worthy on /.

Re:Sounds like an epidemic

[msimm]

Maybe it's been censored in your country?

ZOMG! Heisenberg uncertainty principle for food!

[sourcerror]

ZOMG! Heisenberg uncertainty principle for food!

its enthusiastic, not enthused

[Anonymous Coward]

Please review the dictionary on proper us of the verb enthuse verses the adjective enthusiastic.

and Idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Close the restaurant down for Monday and Tuesday and create a Faraday cage.

Problem solved... all people will do then is bitch about had bad the reception was there and the rest of us will be happy with out all the people chatting on their phones too.

citation needed

[BitterAndDrunk]

Seriously, you don't know shit about cooking meat if you're not resting it.

Re:citation needed

[sjwt]

or perhaps you dont know shit about cooking meat if you need to rest it.

Re:citation needed

[dangitman]

No, you are the one with an ignorance of shit. Resting is essential for many types of meat (not all, though). It is the way it should be cooked. Steak, lamb roasts, that kind of thing definitely benefits. It's not a myth.

Re:citation needed

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Or perhaps you should take a chemistry class.

Re:citation needed

[Anonymous Coward]

I also prefer steak eaten immediately and don't like rested meat. No matter what the accepted truth may be I have always found the taste of meat to be better directly off the grill into my mouth. As another example I also find the explanations provided by most TV chefs about initially "sealing the meat" to be rubbish along with a lot of their other cooking "truths." If they said caramelising makes it taste better, I wouldn't object, but searing the sides of the steak does not stop any of the "juices" from leaking out during cooking.

Re:citation needed

[dzfoo]

idunno whatcha talkin' 'bout. Me and mah kin never needs to rest them steaks when puttin' on the barbeque.

    -dZ.

Re:citation needed

[techno-vampire]

As is pointed out farther down the thread, the difference has nothing to do with chemistry. If you cut open a steak the moment it comes off of the grill, large amounts of very tasty juice run out onto your plate; give it a few minutes to rest and all that juice stays in the steak, giving it a better flavor.

Re:citation needed

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

What causes the increased retention? Perhaps I should have said physics?

Re:citation needed

[techno-vampire]

There's a comment farther down in this thread that explains it, with a link to an interesting article. Basically, it has to do with the way muscle fibers react as the heat up and cool down again.

Re:Life bloggers...

[Anonymous Coward]

They are.. check out youtube for a few of them.

These food bloggers fit into the same category

Re:Hi that was me, from my phone

[X0563511]

Hey drunkie,

I have no problem communicating literately from my phone. Then again, I don't have an iPhone. You brought it on yourself :P

Re:yes but

[X0563511]

I'd rather be a fat cunt than a grabbastic piece of amphibian shit. At least fat cunts get action every now and then.

There. Are we done yet? I invite you to look at my comment history. You'll find me a useful and civil member of the community. I only light up when some horrid piece of shit comes up like your original AC post.

It looked far less like an attempt to be useful, and more like one of those retarded "i was drunk when I wrote this" bots that like to come around now and then.

no, you were being a cunt

[BitterAndDrunk]

My post was perfectly readable, and was the counter-anecdote to the original anecdote.

You, however, wanted to be a nonproductive commenter with a pedantic comment forwarded in an abrasive form.

Hence, bag of shit. In fact, your comment history matters not; "hey your honor, until I raped and murdered that hooker I went to lots of them without incident!"

Who gives a fuck? You wanted to be a pedantic shit in your response to me. Fine. I called it like I saw it, then you tried to get playful with your emoticon. Well, I ain't buying what you're selling. Also, fuck you.

Re:no, you were being a cunt

[X0563511]

Oh, just go fuck off already.

Perhaps the real reason

[Zey]

crimeandpunishment writes:

Some restaurants have taken the step of banning cameras, or at least have established a 'no flash' rule.

Here was I thinking it was because they fear nobody's going to go to a restaurant serving a tiny portion size. The more the cook fancies himself as a great chef, the less you'll get on your plate.

Re:Perhaps the real reason

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering how many people have shown the inability to determine a healthy time to stop eating, chefs should be commended for cutting them off. (I'm returning your extremely inaccurate generalization with one of my own.)

Re:Perhaps the real reason

[dzfoo]

Oh, you're one of those, who equate quantity with quality.

        -dZ.

Re:Perhaps the real reason

[bill_mcgonigle]

Oh, you're one of those, who equate quantity with quality.

Serving a portion size unable to sate a common appetite misses the point of food and eating. Plating skill and preparation are distinguishing features on top of eating, unless one is attending an explicit 'tasting'. Or else it's an underhanded way to upsell dessert.

$10/oz meals that aren't using very expensive ingredients are for the Stockholm diners.

Re:Perhaps the real reason

[dzfoo]

When I go to a fine restaurant, I order at least three courses, but usually four or five. All of them together, each in small portions, are enough to satisfy a "common appetite". Moreover, the many courses intensify the experience by offering a variety of tastes and textures as opposed to, say, a large trough of pasta that feeds four.

        -dZ.

Re:Perhaps the real reason

[bill_mcgonigle]

Good point, I used to try to do these in NY for $50 or less a head. Doubling that would have been finer.

Re:Perhaps the real reason

[Lunzo]

Why can't we have both? Why does it have to be an exclusive or?

Re:Perhaps the real reason

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, and you're one of those who would have me leave restaurants hungry.
I don't go for the "cuisine" - I go for the food!

(For the record I am no fatty... I weigh 125lb, I wish my metabolism would let me gain weight)

Re:Perhaps the real reason

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that better or worse than one of those people who equate a lack of quantity with quality?

Re:Perhaps the real reason

[dzfoo]

I do not equate anything with quality, it stands on its own. The quantity I expect is that which is sufficient to enjoy. I do not go to a fine restaurant looking for a "value meal."

          -dZ.

A few minutes?

[Arancaytar]

Are they using polaroid cameras?

Re:A few minutes?

[bill_mcgonigle]

Are they using polaroid cameras?

Oh, so maybe the real problem is these guys are putting out the candles at neighboring tables.

Mmmm..

[msimm]

Donut.

Could we not link to plagiarists?

[Anonymous Coward]

Original article source:
http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/Lifestyles/Article_2010-05-20-US-FEA-Food-Documenting-Dinner/id-89f348b5d71444df8cfbc2157b2f4674

That's some pretty bad copy and paste, there.

Re:Disturbing the management

[cstacy]

Perhaps the real problem is that all the flash lights disturb the other guests in the restaurant.

Yes, but perhaps the REAL problem is that restaurants don't like customers sharing (often unflattering) reviews of their establishment on the web. Especially sites like Yelp. Curtailing cameras may be seen as a way to discourage the more hardcore restaurant bloggers.

Rest your meats!

[Cassander]

Hi there. I know you're probably a troll, but I'm going to respond to you as if you were serious.

Please note I am a professionally trained chef.

The practice of "resting" meat is important. If you cut into a steak that's hot off the grill, you will see a whole bunch of liquid run out and make a pool on your plate. Think of this as a pool of flavor that you just drained out of your steak. If you give it a few minutes to cool down a little and let the fat congeal, it won't go running out, and you will experience all the intended fatty goodness in every bite.

P.S. If your steak is actually *cold*, then yes somebody is doing something wrong.

Restaurant owners need to chill, and so do patrons

[billcopc]

I don't think there's anything wrong with taking a picture of your meal. ONE! Right when they lay it down in front of you, snap the pic with your phone and dig in.

On countless occasions, I've seen pictures of a dish that made me want to try that dish, when the description alone didn't do it for me. How often have you been sitting in a restaurant, not knowing what to order, when another patron's meal arrives and you say "I want what he's having" ? Well a picture on a blog is the same thing, except I don't have to be in that restaurant to see it. More importantly, if it looks tasty, I am far more likely to want to go there, than were I just randomly walking around with a growling stomach.

In a similar vein, pictures help introduce people to foods they don't know. Show me a picture of something I've never eaten, and I can make a preliminary decision of whether I'd want to put that in my mouth. Show me just some long-ass vowel-anemic name and a terse description, and I'll trot my ignorant ass down to the pub across the street, where I know what I'm ordering. Or worse, I'll blindly order the strange thing, not like it, and tell everyone how disgusting it was.

The only chefs who should be worried about pictures, are the ones serving nasty food. Frankly, they deserve to fail, and anything that expedites the process is fine by me.