Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Social Networks

Food Bloggers Giving Restaurant Owners Heartburn 311

Posted by timothy
from the pics-or-it-didn't-happen dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Food Bloggers Giving Restaurant Owners Heartburn

Comments Filter:
  • by T Murphy (1054674) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @06:39PM (#32309404) Journal
    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.

  • by MonTemplar (174120) <alan.ralph@gmail.com> on Saturday May 22, 2010 @06:58PM (#32309538) Homepage Journal

    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.

  • by Kjella (173770) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @07:07PM (#32309596) Homepage

    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:And once again (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Trailwalker (648636) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @07:18PM (#32309654)
    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.
  • Tacky? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by CodeNameSly (1817530) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @07:28PM (#32309716)
    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:New /. section? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ChipMonk (711367) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @07:40PM (#32309778) Journal
    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:And once again (Score:3, Interesting)

    by FoolishOwl (1698506) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @07:52PM (#32309858) Journal

    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.

  • by Organic Brain Damage (863655) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @08:05PM (#32309960)
    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:And once again (Score:5, Interesting)

    by zippthorne (748122) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @08:44PM (#32310248) Journal

    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...

  • by auLucifer (1371577) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @08:57PM (#32310320)
    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:And once again (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Shadow of Eternity (795165) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @08:57PM (#32310324)

    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 (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bsDaemon (87307) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @09:58PM (#32310740)

    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.

  • by Zey (592528) on Saturday May 22, 2010 @10:25PM (#32310836)
    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:And once again (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hobo sapiens (893427) <[ ] ['' in gap]> on Saturday May 22, 2010 @10:57PM (#32310974) Journal

    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:New /. section? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Hurricane78 (562437) <deletedNO@SPAMslashdot.org> on Saturday May 22, 2010 @11:07PM (#32311016)

    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. :)

  • A few minutes? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Arancaytar (966377) <arancaytar.ilyaran@gmail.com> on Saturday May 22, 2010 @11:44PM (#32311168) Homepage

    Are they using polaroid cameras?

  • Re:And once again (Score:4, Interesting)

    by nelsonal (549144) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @12:32AM (#32311394) Journal
    Ironically, at the high end most of what prostitutes do a lot of chatting [slate.com].

    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 (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 23, 2010 @12:34AM (#32311400)

    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.

One good reason why computers can do more work than people is that they never have to stop and answer the phone.

Working...