I've never been real happy with photos I've taken of food I've made,
so today I decided to try some simple experiments.

<http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0577_1_zps200772b4.jpg>

shows the blueberry-nectarine tart I made last night (or rather what's
left of it) sitting on my kitchen counter, illuminated by a combination
of a 60-watt incandescent in a work light clamped to a cabinet shelf,
the light from a 40-watt halogen bulb in the cook-top hood, the light
from the under-cabinet LEDs, and some back-light from the central over-
head fluorescent fixture.

<http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0578_1_zps19b79da2.jpg>

is a photo of the tart taken with the default camera settings (a Canon
PowerShot A620). It has a disappointing dull orange-y look.

<http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0579_1_zps39fabc0e.jpg>

is what I got when I changed the white balance setting from "automatic"
to "incandescent." Quite an improvement, eh?

Finally,

<http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0580_1_zps455a8a08.jpg>

is what I got when I used a piece of ordinary white copy paper on the
counter to set the "custom" white balance.

That last one looks closest to the real deal to me.

So, the conclusion: You may be able to get better color without
fancy lighting by simply playing with the color balance options on
your camera.

Or, with somewhat more effort, you can make a "whiter" light source,
like this nice MacGyver-ish example:

<http://thetiptoefairy.com/blog/2014/01/diy-soft-lights-photography-blogging.html>

Or, you might be able to take your food outdoors into natural light.
At dinnertime around here in autumn/winter (~7 p.m., New England USA)
that isn't really a viable option :-)

And of course, this addresses (barely) just color and lighting.
Composition, prep, table accessories, etc. are whole other topics.
Google "food photography tips" for more (than you'll ever want to
know if you're not a professional!)

Good luck.

--
Silvar Beitel

On 10/5/2014 3:56 PM, wrote:
> I've never been real happy with photos I've taken of food I've made,
> so today I decided to try some simple experiments.


> Or, with somewhat more effort, you can make a "whiter" light source,
> like this nice MacGyver-ish example:
>
> <http://thetiptoefairy.com/blog/2014/01/diy-soft-lights-photography-blogging.html>
>
> Or, you might be able to take your food outdoors into natural light.
> At dinnertime around here in autumn/winter (~7 p.m., New England USA)
> that isn't really a viable option :-)
>
> And of course, this addresses (barely) just color and lighting.
> Composition, prep, table accessories, etc. are whole other topics.
> Google "food photography tips" for more (than you'll ever want to
> know if you're not a professional!)
>
> Good luck.
>

Thanks for posting that. Lighting is very important and often
overlooked. Soft light, fill light can rally transform a photo. I use
cooler temperature lights for better output.

Flash is so very handy, but harsh and full of shadows. Best to bounce
it or at least diffuse it. Bright sun is also difficult to deal with.
If you rver see a pro photo shoot, you will see assistand holding
relectors to get rid of harsh shadows.

If you want to get serious and take a lot of food photos, build a thee
sided box of white material.

You can spend thousands of dollars and weeks of time getting the perfct
photo from a technical POV but never lose sight of the most important
element. The memories it holds.

Adjusting the lighting certainly makes a difference. However, your photos will always look terrible unless you transfer the food onto a nice dish and use a simple background.

http://www.richardfisher.com

On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 14:23:53 -0700 (PDT), Helpful person
> wrote:

> Adjusting the lighting certainly makes a difference. However, your photos will always look terrible unless you transfer the food onto a nice dish and use a simple background.
>
If they are not taking the picture for money, why bother. If they
have nice plates for everyday use fine. If not, then the resident rfc
critics can suck it up.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On 10/5/2014 3:56 PM, wrote:
> I've never been real happy with photos I've taken of food I've made,
> so today I decided to try some simple experiments.
>
> <http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0577_1_zps200772b4.jpg>
>
> shows the blueberry-nectarine tart I made last night (or rather what's
> left of it) sitting on my kitchen counter, illuminated by a combination
> of a 60-watt incandescent in a work light clamped to a cabinet shelf,
> the light from a 40-watt halogen bulb in the cook-top hood, the light
> from the under-cabinet LEDs, and some back-light from the central over-
> head fluorescent fixture.
>
> <http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0578_1_zps19b79da2.jpg>
>
> is a photo of the tart taken with the default camera settings (a Canon
> PowerShot A620). It has a disappointing dull orange-y look.
>
> <http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0579_1_zps39fabc0e.jpg>
>
> is what I got when I changed the white balance setting from "automatic"
> to "incandescent." Quite an improvement, eh?
>
> Finally,
>
> <http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0580_1_zps455a8a08.jpg>
>
> is what I got when I used a piece of ordinary white copy paper on the
> counter to set the "custom" white balance.
>
> That last one looks closest to the real deal to me.
>
> So, the conclusion: You may be able to get better color without
> fancy lighting by simply playing with the color balance options on
> your camera.
>
> Or, with somewhat more effort, you can make a "whiter" light source,
> like this nice MacGyver-ish example:
>
> <http://thetiptoefairy.com/blog/2014/01/diy-soft-lights-photography-blogging.html>
>
> Or, you might be able to take your food outdoors into natural light.
> At dinnertime around here in autumn/winter (~7 p.m., New England USA)
> that isn't really a viable option :-)
>
> And of course, this addresses (barely) just color and lighting.
> Composition, prep, table accessories, etc. are whole other topics.
> Google "food photography tips" for more (than you'll ever want to
> know if you're not a professional!)
>
> Good luck.
>
Thanks for going to all that trouble. I can't be bothered. If people
don't like the food pics I (rarely) take, tough luck. I don't cook to
show off, I cook because I enjoy it. Oh, and there's that other pesky
little thing: if you don't eat, you'll die. I'm sure not jumping
through hoops to "prove" I cooked something.

Jill

"Helpful person" > wrote in message
...
> Adjusting the lighting certainly makes a difference. However, your photos
> will always look terrible unless you transfer the food onto a nice dish
> and use a simple background.
>
> http://www.richardfisher.com

Well, we can't all have Sheldon's plate!

On 10/5/2014 6:30 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 14:23:53 -0700 (PDT), Helpful person
> > wrote:
>
>> Adjusting the lighting certainly makes a difference. However, your photos will always look terrible unless you transfer the food onto a nice dish and use a simple background.
>>
> If they are not taking the picture for money, why bother. If they
> have nice plates for everyday use fine. If not, then the resident rfc
> critics can suck it up.
>
+1

I don't waste my time trying to get perfect pictures of food.

Jill

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 14:23:53 -0700 (PDT), Helpful person
> > wrote:
>
>> Adjusting the lighting certainly makes a difference. However, your
>> photos will always look terrible unless you transfer the food onto a nice
>> dish and use a simple background.
>>
> If they are not taking the picture for money, why bother. If they
> have nice plates for everyday use fine. If not, then the resident rfc
> critics can suck it up.

Truly.

Cheri

"Julie Bove" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Helpful person" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Adjusting the lighting certainly makes a difference. However, your
>> photos will always look terrible unless you transfer the food onto a nice
>> dish and use a simple background.
>>
>> http://www.richardfisher.com
>
> Well, we can't all have Sheldon's plate!

LOL

On Sunday, October 5, 2014 5:37:08 PM UTC-5, jmcquown wrote:
>
> On 10/5/2014 6:30 PM, sf wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 14:23:53 -0700 (PDT), Helpful person
>
> >> Adjusting the lighting certainly makes a difference. However, your photos will always look terrible unless you transfer the food onto a nice dish and use a simple background.
>
>
> > If they are not taking the picture for money, why bother. If they
> > have nice plates for everyday use fine. If not, then the resident rfc
> > critics can suck it up.
>
>
> +1
>
>
> I don't waste my time trying to get perfect pictures of food.
>
> Jill
>
>
+2

> wrote in message
...
> On Sunday, October 5, 2014 5:37:08 PM UTC-5, jmcquown wrote:
>>
>> On 10/5/2014 6:30 PM, sf wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 14:23:53 -0700 (PDT), Helpful person
>>
>> >> Adjusting the lighting certainly makes a difference. However, your
>> >> photos will always look terrible unless you transfer the food onto a
>> >> nice dish and use a simple background.
>>
>>
>> > If they are not taking the picture for money, why bother. If they
>> > have nice plates for everyday use fine. If not, then the resident rfc
>> > critics can suck it up.
>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>>
>> I don't waste my time trying to get perfect pictures of food.
>>
>> Jill
>>
>>
> +2

I don't care enough about the opinion of a couple of wannabe food critics to
post pics. If I did, I would. LOL

Cheri

On 10/5/2014 9:51 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 12:56:57 -0700 (PDT),
> wrote:
>
>> I've never been real happy with photos I've taken of food I've made,
>> so today I decided to try some simple experiments.
>>
>> <http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0577_1_zps200772b4.jpg>
>>
>> shows the blueberry-nectarine tart I made last night (or rather what's
>> left of it) sitting on my kitchen counter, illuminated by a combination
>> of a 60-watt incandescent in a work light clamped to a cabinet shelf,
>> the light from a 40-watt halogen bulb in the cook-top hood, the light
>> from the under-cabinet LEDs, and some back-light from the central over-
>> head fluorescent fixture.
>>
>> <http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0578_1_zps19b79da2.jpg>
>>
>> is a photo of the tart taken with the default camera settings (a Canon
>> PowerShot A620). It has a disappointing dull orange-y look.
>>
>> <http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0579_1_zps39fabc0e.jpg>
>>
>> is what I got when I changed the white balance setting from "automatic"
>> to "incandescent." Quite an improvement, eh?
>>
>> Finally,
>>
>> <http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0580_1_zps455a8a08.jpg>
>>
>> is what I got when I used a piece of ordinary white copy paper on the
>> counter to set the "custom" white balance.
>>
>> That last one looks closest to the real deal to me.
>>
>> So, the conclusion: You may be able to get better color without
>> fancy lighting by simply playing with the color balance options on
>> your camera.
>>
>> Or, with somewhat more effort, you can make a "whiter" light source,
>> like this nice MacGyver-ish example:
>>
>> <http://thetiptoefairy.com/blog/2014/01/diy-soft-lights-photography-blogging.html>
>>
>> Or, you might be able to take your food outdoors into natural light.
>> At dinnertime around here in autumn/winter (~7 p.m., New England USA)
>> that isn't really a viable option :-)
>>
>> And of course, this addresses (barely) just color and lighting.
>> Composition, prep, table accessories, etc. are whole other topics.
>> Google "food photography tips" for more (than you'll ever want to
>> know if you're not a professional!)
>
>
> And this is all going to help tert in seattle.... how? ;-)
>
> -sw
>
Will it help Sheldon keep his cats off the kitchen counters?

Jill

On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 12:56:57 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

>I've never been real happy with photos I've taken of food I've made,
>so today I decided to try some simple experiments.
>
><http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0577_1_zps200772b4.jpg>
>
>shows the blueberry-nectarine tart I made last night (or rather what's
>left of it) sitting on my kitchen counter, illuminated by a combination
>of a 60-watt incandescent in a work light clamped to a cabinet shelf,
>the light from a 40-watt halogen bulb in the cook-top hood, the light
>from the under-cabinet LEDs, and some back-light from the central over-
>head fluorescent fixture.
>
><http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0578_1_zps19b79da2.jpg>
>
>is a photo of the tart taken with the default camera settings (a Canon
>PowerShot A620). It has a disappointing dull orange-y look.
>
><http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0579_1_zps39fabc0e.jpg>
>
>is what I got when I changed the white balance setting from "automatic"
>to "incandescent." Quite an improvement, eh?
>
>Finally,
>
><http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa407/Silvar_Beitel/RFC/Photograping%20Food/IMG_0580_1_zps455a8a08.jpg>
>
>is what I got when I used a piece of ordinary white copy paper on the
>counter to set the "custom" white balance.
>
>That last one looks closest to the real deal to me.
>
>So, the conclusion: You may be able to get better color without
>fancy lighting by simply playing with the color balance options on
>your camera.
>
>Or, with somewhat more effort, you can make a "whiter" light source,
>like this nice MacGyver-ish example:
>
><http://thetiptoefairy.com/blog/2014/01/diy-soft-lights-photography-blogging.html>
>
>Or, you might be able to take your food outdoors into natural light.
>At dinnertime around here in autumn/winter (~7 p.m., New England USA)
>that isn't really a viable option :-)
>
>And of course, this addresses (barely) just color and lighting.
>Composition, prep, table accessories, etc. are whole other topics.
>Google "food photography tips" for more (than you'll ever want to
>know if you're not a professional!)
>
>Good luck.

Thank you for sharing your observations, very helpful.

koko

--

Food is our common ground, a universal experience
James Beard

On Monday, October 6, 2014 1:05:51 AM UTC-4, Cheri wrote:

> I don't care enough about the opinion of a couple of wannabe food critics to
> post pics. If I did, I would. LOL

I don't post photos to solicit opinions from critics, or to prove I made
something, or to show off. I post photos because I made something I
liked and thought to share it with people on this newsgroup. And you'll
be more likely to like it and maybe even make it if my photos are in
focus and the same color as the actual food. That's worth a few extra
seconds.

--
Silvar Beitel

On Sunday, October 5, 2014 6:30:11 PM UTC-4, sf wrote:
>
> If they are not taking the picture for money, why bother. If they
> have nice plates for everyday use fine. If not, then the resident rfc
> critics can suck it up.
>
Why bother taking the photo at all? Why bother posting about it?

http://www.richardfisher.com

On Sunday, October 5, 2014 6:37:08 PM UTC-4, jmcquown wrote:
>
> I don't waste my time trying to get perfect pictures of food.
>
> Jill

Fair enough. That's your decision and not
really anyone else's business.

http://www.richardfisher.com

> wrote in message
...
> On Monday, October 6, 2014 1:05:51 AM UTC-4, Cheri wrote:
>
>> I don't care enough about the opinion of a couple of wannabe food critics
>> to
>> post pics. If I did, I would. LOL
>
> I don't post photos to solicit opinions from critics, or to prove I made
> something, or to show off. I post photos because I made something I
> liked and thought to share it with people on this newsgroup. And you'll
> be more likely to like it and maybe even make it if my photos are in
> focus and the same color as the actual food. That's worth a few extra
> seconds.
>
> --
> Silvar Beitel

And my post would not apply to YOU as "one of the couple." If people want to
take pictures of their meals, I think that's great, I enjoy seeing them, but
no reason for anyone to hassle someone for not posting pics. I'm less
inclined to post pics as time goes on after seeing some of the nastiness
that ensues.

Cheri

Sqwertz wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 22:05:51 -0700, Cheri wrote:
>
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Sunday, October 5, 2014 5:37:08 PM UTC-5, jmcquown wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 10/5/2014 6:30 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 14:23:53 -0700 (PDT), Helpful person
>>>>
>>>> >> Adjusting the lighting certainly makes a difference. However, your
>>>> >> photos will always look terrible unless you transfer the food onto a
>>>> >> nice dish and use a simple background.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > If they are not taking the picture for money, why bother. If they
>>>> > have nice plates for everyday use fine. If not, then the resident rfc
>>>> > critics can suck it up.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't waste my time trying to get perfect pictures of food.
>>>>
>>>> Jill
>>>>
>>>>
>>> +2
>>
>> I don't care enough about the opinion of a couple of wannabe food critics to
>> post pics. If I did, I would. LOL
>
> Some of us who do post pictures couldn't give a rat's ass about
> anybody's opinions. We post them to give people knowledge, ideas, and
> inspiration for cooking their own foods. It's the same we often do
> when posting without pictures (when we're not beathing some horse to
> death or feeding the trolls).
>
> The obnoxious loud mouths aren't even 1/10th of the audience. There
> is still another 90% of people who may get some use out of the
> information (and optional photos) rather than the pedantic enjoyment
> of simply mocking them. This *is* supposed to be what the group is
> for - for cooking and demonstrating kitchen, cooking, and presentation
> techniques.
>
> The reasons you folks give for not posting pictures are just cop-outs.
> I have nothing against people who don't post pictures. If you don't
> want to, then don't. The problem is with the people who make lame
> excuses for not posting pictures and implying that those of us who do
> are idiots for doing so.
>
> +5


I call bullshit

On Mon, 6 Oct 2014 11:09:20 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> The reasons you folks give for not posting pictures are just cop-outs.

> Omelet wrote:
>
>> He hates me 'cause I never slept with him...
>
> He hates himself because he is all he has to sleep with
> I don't know, sometimes he used to seem normal, then he went petty
> trough vindictive and now I just shun contact. I have enough crazies to
> deal with in my world without encouraging those who refuse to take their
> meds.

For the record, I never once even considered sleeping with you. And
you know that. You're the one who somehow got the idea that I was
going to move in with you - and you posted that to RFC just out of the
total blue.

After having met you twice at casual austin.food gatherings 2 or 3
years ago and not giving you any indication that there was any sort of
romantic interest in the least, you somehow twisted that into MY
MOVING IN WITH YOU?

That was just way too Psycho for me. I sat there at stared at the
screen for at least 15 minutes wondering, WTF? That was just way too
spooky. I've met weird, semi-psycho women before but you win, hands
down. Mapi of austin.general still holds the male title, but at least
he announced his psychosis right there lying on the floor of the bar
at B.D. Reilly's rather than romantically obsessing over me for 2
years.

Needless to say, you need to come to terms with what happened and why
your mind works that way and stop making up excuses for your fixation
and disappointment before we become the next Yoli and Michael. I'd
prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

And Jeremy, I was just tired of your decade of bullshit and visions of
grandeur about all these things you're "working on" or have not done
in the past. Even posting a call for meetings with imaginary people
about imaginary projects of yours at "the normal time and place", as
if you are somebody important with a life. I'm pretty sure you're
manic depressive mixed with habitual liar.

Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw

On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 21:04:49 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> Nothing phony
> about it:

> Omelet wrote:
>
>> He hates me 'cause I never slept with him...
>
> He hates himself because he is all he has to sleep with
> I don't know, sometimes he used to seem normal, then he went petty
> trough vindictive and now I just shun contact. I have enough crazies to
> deal with in my world without encouraging those who refuse to take their
> meds.

For the record, I never once even considered sleeping with you. And
you know that. You're the one who somehow got the idea that I was
going to move in with you - and you posted that to RFC just out of the
total blue.

After having met you twice at casual austin.food gatherings 2 or 3
years ago and not giving you any indication that there was any sort of
romantic interest in the least, you somehow twisted that into MY
MOVING IN WITH YOU?

That was just way too Psycho for me. I sat there at stared at the
screen for at least 15 minutes wondering, WTF? That was just way too
spooky. I've met weird, semi-psycho women before but you win, hands
down. Mapi of austin.general still holds the male title, but at least
he announced his psychosis right there lying on the floor of the bar
at B.D. Reilly's rather than romantically obsessing over me for 2
years.

Needless to say, you need to come to terms with what happened and why
your mind works that way and stop making up excuses for your fixation
and disappointment before we become the next Yoli and Michael. I'd
prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

And Jeremy, I was just tired of your decade of bullshit and visions of
grandeur about all these things you're "working on" or have not done
in the past. Even posting a call for meetings with imaginary people
about imaginary projects of yours at "the normal time and place", as
if you are somebody important with a life. I'm pretty sure you're
manic depressive mixed with habitual liar.

Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw

On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 20:51:49 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> And this is all going to help tert in seattle.... how? ;-)
>
> -sw

> Omelet wrote:
>
>> He hates me 'cause I never slept with him...
>
> He hates himself because he is all he has to sleep with
> I don't know, sometimes he used to seem normal, then he went petty
> trough vindictive and now I just shun contact. I have enough crazies to
> deal with in my world without encouraging those who refuse to take their
> meds.

For the record, I never once even considered sleeping with you. And
you know that. You're the one who somehow got the idea that I was
going to move in with you - and you posted that to RFC just out of the
total blue.

After having met you twice at casual austin.food gatherings 2 or 3
years ago and not giving you any indication that there was any sort of
romantic interest in the least, you somehow twisted that into MY
MOVING IN WITH YOU?

That was just way too Psycho for me. I sat there at stared at the
screen for at least 15 minutes wondering, WTF? That was just way too
spooky. I've met weird, semi-psycho women before but you win, hands
down. Mapi of austin.general still holds the male title, but at least
he announced his psychosis right there lying on the floor of the bar
at B.D. Reilly's rather than romantically obsessing over me for 2
years.

Needless to say, you need to come to terms with what happened and why
your mind works that way and stop making up excuses for your fixation
and disappointment before we become the next Yoli and Michael. I'd
prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

And Jeremy, I was just tired of your decade of bullshit and visions of
grandeur about all these things you're "working on" or have not done
in the past. Even posting a call for meetings with imaginary people
about imaginary projects of yours at "the normal time and place", as
if you are somebody important with a life. I'm pretty sure you're
manic depressive mixed with habitual liar.

Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw

Helpful person wrote:
>
> On Sunday, October 5, 2014 6:30:11 PM UTC-4, sf wrote:
> >
> > If they are not taking the picture for money, why bother. If they
> > have nice plates for everyday use fine. If not, then the resident rfc
> > critics can suck it up.
> >
> Why bother taking the photo at all? Why bother posting about it?

Well! You're not being a very Helpful person here.

G.

On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 21:04:49 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Sun, 05 Oct 2014 16:54:32 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> You can spend thousands of dollars and weeks of time getting the perfct
>> photo from a technical POV but never lose sight of the most important
>> element. The memories it holds.
>
>I concentrate more on the taste of the food rather than how well it
>photograph. I take photos for "appetite inspiration", not for the
>covers of magazines.
>
>I hate those phony food photos that accompany a recipe, but the recipe
>clearly doesn't match the photo. I've seen that a thousand times.
>That's the phoniest, most dishonest kind of food photography there is.
>
>Toasted ciabatta bread spread with Delallo hot pepper and garlic
>condiment, salami, and slices of a prosciutto log and toasted again.
>Served with a tomato bisque and pickled baby asparagus. Nothing phony
>about it:
>
>https://www.flickr.com/photos/sqwert...ream/lightbox/

Got a care package yesterday...
Wonderful ciabatta, crispy crunchy crust with a creamy dreamy crumb,
ate it with nothing:
http://i62.tinypic.com/20z7g21.jpg
Their rye bread looked better than it tasted, not a Jewish rye, used
some for turkey sandwiches:
http://i59.tinypic.com/wt5zjt.jpg

Sqwertz wrote:
>Cheri wrote:
>> itsjoannotjoann wrote:
>>>jmcquown wrote:
>>>>sf wrote:
>>>> >Helpful person
>>>>
>>>> >> Adjusting the lighting certainly makes a difference. However, your
>>>> >> photos will always look terrible unless you transfer the food onto a
>>>> >> nice dish and use a simple background.
>>>>
>>>> > If they are not taking the picture for money, why bother. If they
>>>> > have nice plates for everyday use fine. If not, then the resident rfc
>>>> > critics can suck it up.
>>>>
>>>> I don't waste my time trying to get perfect pictures of food.

>>
>> I don't care enough about the opinion of a couple of wannabe food critics to
>> post pics. If I did, I would. LOL
>
>Some of us who do post pictures couldn't give a rat's ass about
>anybody's opinions. We post them to give people knowledge, ideas, and
>inspiration for cooking their own foods. It's the same we often do
>when posting without pictures (when we're not beathing some horse to
>death or feeding the trolls).
>
>The obnoxious loud mouths aren't even 1/10th of the audience. There
>is still another 90% of people who may get some use out of the
>information (and optional photos) rather than the pedantic enjoyment
>of simply mocking them. This *is* supposed to be what the group is
>for - for cooking and demonstrating kitchen, cooking, and presentation
>techniques.
>
>The reasons you folks give for not posting pictures are just cop-outs.
>I have nothing against people who don't post pictures. If you don't
>want to, then don't. The problem is with the people who make lame
>excuses for not posting pictures and implying that those of us who do
>are idiots for doing so.
>
>+5
>
>Bulgogi Skirt Steak with Peppers and Onions and home made cucumber
>kimchi. Rage away.
>
>https://www.flickr.com/photos/sqwert...ream/lightbox/

A bit out of focus but looks quite edible, something I'd like... and a
nice healthy portion.

The people who don't post pictures but have the need to say why not
know in their hearts nothing they cook is worthy of a camera. I
really don't care how my photos are critiqued, sometimes well
appreciated sometimes not, can't please all the people all the time...
I also consider the source as I do with all posts here... several
posters are not worth recognizing, I do my best to skip over their
posts.

On Mon, 6 Oct 2014 16:23:44 +0000 (UTC), tert in seattle
> wrote:

>Sqwertz wrote:
>> On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 22:05:51 -0700, Cheri wrote:
>>
>>> > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Sunday, October 5, 2014 5:37:08 PM UTC-5, jmcquown wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/5/2014 6:30 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 14:23:53 -0700 (PDT), Helpful person
>>>>>
>>>>> >> Adjusting the lighting certainly makes a difference. However, your
>>>>> >> photos will always look terrible unless you transfer the food onto a
>>>>> >> nice dish and use a simple background.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> > If they are not taking the picture for money, why bother. If they
>>>>> > have nice plates for everyday use fine. If not, then the resident rfc
>>>>> > critics can suck it up.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't waste my time trying to get perfect pictures of food.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jill
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> +2
>>>
>>> I don't care enough about the opinion of a couple of wannabe food critics to
>>> post pics. If I did, I would. LOL
>>
>> Some of us who do post pictures couldn't give a rat's ass about
>> anybody's opinions. We post them to give people knowledge, ideas, and
>> inspiration for cooking their own foods. It's the same we often do
>> when posting without pictures (when we're not beathing some horse to
>> death or feeding the trolls).
>>
>> The obnoxious loud mouths aren't even 1/10th of the audience. There
>> is still another 90% of people who may get some use out of the
>> information (and optional photos) rather than the pedantic enjoyment
>> of simply mocking them. This *is* supposed to be what the group is
>> for - for cooking and demonstrating kitchen, cooking, and presentation
>> techniques.
>>
>> The reasons you folks give for not posting pictures are just cop-outs.
>> I have nothing against people who don't post pictures. If you don't
>> want to, then don't. The problem is with the people who make lame
>> excuses for not posting pictures and implying that those of us who do
>> are idiots for doing so.
>
>I call bullshit

I call envious... I don't always agree with the dwarf but most of his
posts have value so I weed and feed. Tert on the other foot has never
posted anything worth the band width.

On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 03:47:52 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> Ciabatta is a flat loaf or roll.
>
> -sw

> Omelet wrote:
>
>> He hates me 'cause I never slept with him...
>
> He hates himself because he is all he has to sleep with
> I don't know, sometimes he used to seem normal, then he went petty
> trough vindictive and now I just shun contact. I have enough crazies to
> deal with in my world without encouraging those who refuse to take their
> meds.

For the record, I never once even considered sleeping with you. And
you know that. You're the one who somehow got the idea that I was
going to move in with you - and you posted that to RFC just out of the
total blue.

After having met you twice at casual austin.food gatherings 2 or 3
years ago and not giving you any indication that there was any sort of
romantic interest in the least, you somehow twisted that into MY
MOVING IN WITH YOU?

That was just way too Psycho for me. I sat there at stared at the
screen for at least 15 minutes wondering, WTF? That was just way too
spooky. I've met weird, semi-psycho women before but you win, hands
down. Mapi of austin.general still holds the male title, but at least
he announced his psychosis right there lying on the floor of the bar
at B.D. Reilly's rather than romantically obsessing over me for 2
years.

Needless to say, you need to come to terms with what happened and why
your mind works that way and stop making up excuses for your fixation
and disappointment before we become the next Yoli and Michael. I'd
prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

And Jeremy, I was just tired of your decade of bullshit and visions of
grandeur about all these things you're "working on" or have not done
in the past. Even posting a call for meetings with imaginary people
about imaginary projects of yours at "the normal time and place", as
if you are somebody important with a life. I'm pretty sure you're
manic depressive mixed with habitual liar.

Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw