David A. Goldfarb

I'm following with interest. My surprise isn't directed at your test so much as the fact that the manufacturer recommends a procedure that apparently no one follows. Apologies if that was taken in the wrong light.

I would regard Temple Grandin as a very reliable source on this sort of issue with very solid credentials in academia and the livestock industry. "Animal welfare activist" is a bit misleading without a little more context. She has designed systems that are in wide use for handling livestock on feed lots and in slaughterhouses.

Flying Pigs comes to the Union Square Greenmarket regularly, so I suppose you could ask them.

Indeed, to be fair, when I bring my Trader Joe's cooler bag to Trader Joe's, they do pack it intelligently, putting the frozen and cold items in the bag first and setting aside the items that don't need to stay cool in case there isn't enough space in the cooler bag, so I can deal with the toddler in the shopping cart.

Good heavens, I've never seen this intentionally done to an aluminum pan. It doesn't seem like a good idea.

Heh. Whenever I shop, I carry a Trader Joe's cooler bag that holds about two grocery bags worth, and an extra canvas bag if I need more space, and I usually pack them myself. I hate the accumulation of plastic bags and the inane way they are usually packed, considering that, like most New Yorkers, I'm going to go home on foot or by public transportation.

If you want to know the volume of each pan, fill them with water and measure with a measuring cup. If it's too tricky to pour the water out, you could put each pan on a scale and fill it to weigh the water.

I've used mine in both a pot and a wok. With a wok, the cover on the steamer seems adequate, but with a pot, I find I usually have to use the pot's cover. I've also tried using it in a shallow pan, but this seems not to work as well. If I'm not using the wok for something else, and if it wouldn't take up too much real estate on the stovetop, I use the wok.

I used Photoshop CS2 (two generations old), but didn't use any plugins or anything I couldn't do with something much more basic. The basic things you want are curves, histogram levels, color adjustment, cropping, resizing, sharpening and the ability to save in a few of the common formats, like JPEG and TIFF. Cloning is also handy for small touchups. Here I just used color balance adjustment, histogram levels, and cropping.

Here are a few I've taken playing with different natural light forms. I've not used any flash (which has been suggested to me a few times) except once in front of a carving station in a dark room. I am using a Konica Minolta DiMAGE Z6 for all my photos. I looked it up, and this is a 6 Mpix camera with a zoom lens and a macro mode. For now, this can do a lot of what you need. It's not a professional camera, but it's better than what people were using for print illustration when digital cameras first started to become acceptable for such use. I knew a commercial photographer who had a long career shooting large and medium format film, which are arguably still better than even high end digital setups costing tens of thousands of dollars, but for a lot of print use, he was able to shoot with a 3.3 Mpix Nikon Coolpix 990, which cost $1000 new, and was one of the first digital cameras widely used by photojournalists. Your camera is better than the Coolpix 990. Let's just look at this one in detail. First off, are the plate and the tablecloth this shade of magenta? Probably not. The default white balance on your camera is probably auto. Our brain adjusts so that we think we're seeing colors similarly under artificial and natural lighting, but in reality, tungsten incandescent lights are usually very yellow-red; daylight is considered neutral; flash is close to daylight typically; and fluorescents have a non-continuous spectrum, so they may be bluish or yellow-red, but they'll also have a green cast which needs to be corrected by adding magenta. If you can control your camera's white balance setting, try setting it to match the light that you're actually using--tungsten for most incandescent lights, fluorescent, daylight, shade, etc., and that will put you in the ballpark, but even then, you might need to tweak with whatever editing software you have. Custom white balance is even better, if you have that option--read your camera manual. Try not to mix light sources of different types, like sunlight from a window and a desk lamp, because it will be difficult to correct for both light sources in post processing. You can gel them to match, but that's a bit more advanced than this discussion here. If you use one main light source and white reflectors, then all the light will be the same color. Your editing software will have auto correction that is likely to be better than what is in the camera, but even that may not make the image look appealing. I put this through auto correction in Photoshop and found it a bit blue-cyan, and warmed it up by adding some red back. Composition--what's that black thing on the right side of the frame? It looks like a tongs or something, and it's leading the eye away from the subject. Try to simplify for now. Those elaborate setups you see with tableware, cloths, and flowers in Gourmet magazine are beautiful, but they often take about a day to shoot with many intermediate setups and often quite intricate lighting. It's best to get this right in the camera, but here's a quick crop to show what you might have done without changing the setup. I also adjusted the histogram levels to bring up the highlights and midtones and generally give it a brighter look. Now beyond this, there are things that would need to be addressed while making the photograph, rather than in post processing. You've set this up in a two dimensional way--basically a flat image on a plate--which is a reasonable approach with flat objects, and if you want to go with that, think about making geometric shapes that complement each other. I like the yin-yang thing you've got going with the sauce, but notice that you've got a noodle out of control on the right side. Presentation that is perfectly good for fine dining may not be adequate for photography. Think of how many buns they may have to look at to get one perfect one for a Big Mac ad, and how they may have to move around the sesame seeds to make them look balanced. Long tweezers are good for those kinds of details. Be sure to look at it on the camera screen, so you know what the lens sees, since you may not notice it just looking at the plate. Use a tripod, so that you get sharp results, and so that you can build the composition without having to reposition the camera constantly. Could you arrange it in a more three dimensional way? How about photographing it at a lower angle and setting the whole terrine on a rectangular plate behind the serving plate, so there would be something with some height in the picture? Lighting--Lighting can be soft, like the diffuse indirect light coming from a window or hard like a spot light. Good food photography usually benefits from both--soft light to illuminate the subject and hard light to accent the shape with bright specular highlights. Large light sources relative to the size of the subject are softer than small, pinpoint light sources. You can make a small light larger by adding a diffuser in front of it, or by bouncing the light off a larger surface, or by moving the light closer to the subject. The light here is fairly hard, and while it's giving some good specular highlights, it's also casting shadows that are complicating the composition. It looks like it could have been a desk lamp or maybe two desk lamps. In nature, there is only one main light--the sun--so you generally want one dominant light source for a natural look. Multiple strong light sources create a theatrical look, which can work, but is much more difficult to get right. The hard light isn't working well on the noodles either, causing them to look greasy. To soften the light, you could do something as simple as hanging a white sheet of paper in front of the light or turning the light away from the food, and bouncing it off a large white card (foamcore board works well). Also, look at where the shadows are going on the camera screen and consider whether they add to or distract from the composition. Try to work with just one light for now, but multi-light setups involve a combination of a main light that illuminates and gives shape to most of the scene, diffuse fill light, which is fairly flat and adjusts the contrast ratio between the bright parts of the image and the shadows, and smaller accent lights to draw attention to one thing or another or give a sense of shape. If you want to learn about light, I highly recommend the book, Light: Science and Magic by Hunter, Biver, and Fuqua. I'd say it's a must-read, if you want to try to photograph your own cookbook. With a one light setup, you can use a simple reflector for fill. This can be a sheet of paper or a piece of foamcore. The object is to throw some light into the shadows and make sure they have some detail in the image, but not so much that the scene has no shape. The terrine gives you an opportunity for some translucency, which is an effect that I usually try to exploit. Arrange the food and light it from behind to see if you can get some light coming through the terrine and illuminating it from within, but you might use black cards or some black cloth to keep the light on the terrine from spilling over to other parts of the scene. Here's a simple shot that I posted recently that illustrates a few of these ideas-- The setup is simple, and the camera was a Canon 40D with a manual focus, 35mm lens. The camera was fairly close to the pancetta, and I used a wide aperture to create a short depth of field zone, to draw attention to the cut slices, which are the sharpest part of the image, and to give a feeling of three dimensional space. Depth of field refers to the zone of the image that appears sharp, and is a function of the focal length of the lens, the subject distance, the aperture and the format of the film or sensor. At very close distances, as are often used in food photography, the focal length is less important than the magnification ratio, and unless you own different cameras, you don't have much control over the format, so you can reduce depth of field by moving the camera closer to the subject or by using a wider lens aperture (a smaller f:stop number is a wider aperture). The lighting was just a window behind and to the left of the subject. Backlighting made it possible to show some translucency in the thin rear slice of pancetta, but backlighting also makes for high contrast, so to adjust the contrast, I used a sheet of paper clipped to a bag of flour that I had handy as a fill reflector, and adjusted the position of the reflector until I had a good balance of main light to fill light on the camera's LCD screen, and I also checked the histogram to be sure I had room for adjustment in post processing. I have lights, stands, and fancier cameras, but for a quick shot for the web, you don't necessarily need that much, and there is more than enough resolution in the full size version of this image for reproduction in print.

It does help to work with a calibrated monitor, but since not everyone has a calibrated monitor, you will still get different results on different monitors. The main thing you get by calibrating your monitor is more consistent printing from a profiled printer. That said, I've found that I'm more likely to get a better result from a range of uncalibrated monitors as long as I adjust my photos on a calibrated monitor. There is visual calibration software, which doesn't require any special equipment, and there are calibration devices, which don't require as good an eye, but if you use a calibration device for a while, you'll develop an eye for subtle color casts. I use the Pantone Eye-One Display 2 device. Norman Koren has a good introduction to monitor calibration-- http://www.normankoren.com/makingfineprints1A.html It's kind of heavy reading in parts, but if you want to sort this out, it's worth the slog. Another thing to be aware of particularly for images posted to the web is color space, which determines how numeric values for color in your digital image file are mapped to real colors in a browser (and then displayed accurately or inaccurately, depending on the calibration of the monitor). For the web, you'll get the most consistent results by saving your images using the sRGB color space.

The light is more important than the camera, presuming the lens can focus close enough for food, and the resolution of the camera is sufficient for your final output. Lighting can be expensive or free. You can do a lot with natural light from a window and a reflector, which can be as simple as a sheet of paper. What are you using now? Post some photographs you've made, and I might be able to make some suggestions.

Sometimes just salt and pepper. Often I'll make mushrooms and caramelized onions or shallots, deglazed with armagnac or red wine or sherry. I make onion confit and keep it on hand for such occasions--about 4-5 lbs of onions cooked down in chicken fat. Chicken fat is the best for onions. If I want something with a fresher taste, particularly if tomatoes are in season, I'll make a relish of chopped fresh tomatoes, maybe some sweet raw onion, oil cured olives, maybe a hot pepper of some sort, olive oil and good sherry vinegar, sometimes rosemary or oregano, salt and pepper. This is also good with grilled fish steaks like swordfish or halibut.

As I mentioned in the other thread, my father had a few Leyse Toroware pots and pans that were standard restaurant ware at the time, and we used them, and my parents still use them all the time. Leyse has since been divided between Vollrath and a company called Hi-Tech Graphics. My parents also have some black anodized Calphalon, and I have a Club cast aluminum dutch oven that belonged to my grandmother and must be at least fifty or sixty years old. As best I can tell, all aluminum pits. I would guess that this is caused by interaction with acidic foods, and the aluminum must go somewhere, so I'm guessing it goes into the food. Is it enough to make it taste metallic? Maybe. I haven't been using it myself for a while, and I don't use the aluminum dutch oven or an aluminum stock pot that I have for anything acidic. The frypans have warped with use, but they're still functional, as long as one isn't too particular about having a perfectly flat pan. I know I've hammered them a few times over the years. The saucepans have remained flat, as has the cast aluminum dutch oven. I used to cook sometimes in the boarding house in college, and we had aluminum pots and pans for the most part, and on the high heat of a commercial stove, it was possible to melt the aluminum. I think I noticed this while sauteeing peppers for a big batch of salsa, and I saw the metal starting to bubble where the handle met the pan. I would suspect that the handle is a different alloy from the pan, so it may have a lower melting point. I've never seasoned aluminum or taken particular care about cleaning it. Scotch Brite pads, steel wool, whatever works, and if one sands off some aluminum in the process, just rinse carefully and finish cleaning with soap and a plain sponge. [edited info about Leyse]

I also use pretty much the same method as Fat Guy, but if I have duck fat on hand, I prefer duck fat to olive oil.

You could sub apricots with no problem in this mango-strawberry tarte Tatin that I blogged about recently-- http://familyoffood.blogspot.com/2009/06/m...-down-tart.html For the crust I used the tarte shell recipe in the _Les Halles Cookbook_ more or less, but you could use any shortbread crust you're comfortable with.

Aluminum oxidizes very rapidly upon exposure to air and the oxide forms a very tough coating, which is why aluminum doesn't rust and break down like iron. We grew up with a few pieces of Leyse Toroware aluminum, which was standard restaurant equipment, in the house, and I don't think there's any downside to using it infrequently or advantage to using it more. It bows and pits with time and use, whether it's used a lot in a restaurant or once or twice a day at home.

If there's no link to comment on the article or the recipe, they usually show up on his blog by the next day or so at http://bitten.blogs.nytimes.com/

I like it in BBQ sauce, dark breads, and a few other things. What's not to like?

The Lobster Place (a fish shop about a block from Pearl Oyster Bar) on Bleecker had them yesterday. If they're around, I'm fairly sure they'll be available at Grand Central Oyster Bar.

Go for dessert and an espresso at Ferrara's. A place that was probably considered "Little Italy" at one time, but these days is more Chinatown is Forlini's on Baxter St. The food is nothing special, old school New York Sunday gravy style, but it's not bad, and it has some history and an interesting atmosphere as a popular spot for lawyers, judges and others who work in the nearby courthouses.

If you're looking at $200 for a 10" frypan, Metro Kitchen has Mauviel 2.5mm copper lined with stainless on sale at that price right now-- http://www.metrokitchen.com/product/M-6504-26

Migliorelli recently had these fat little carrots, maybe an inch or two long, which are a pain to peel, but are incredibly sweet and flavor packed. I put them with some potato wedges to roast around a duck a couple of nights ago, and they were fantastic. Also, the local fishmongers have had great black sea bass lately. Buy the whole fish and fillet it yourself, and it comes out to about half the price of fillets, plus you get to keep the head and bones for stock.

I'm sitting right now at a table at Amy's Bread in Greenwich Village, a couple of doors down from Murray's, having a coffee and a focaccia raisin twist, and the Murray's guys in white aprons just came around the corner with a cart stacked with bins and boxes marked with names like "Bar Boulud," "Cafe Boulud," "Hyatt Regency" ready to load into the truck. Alas, it's one of the few times I don't have a camera with me. Update: Ten minutes later, a new truck arrives delivering boxes of cheese to Murray's. I need to hang out here more often.

Lovely. It reminds me of the time I was cooking in the kitchen of a friend's restaurant and all the old standard aluminum restaurant pans were so warped they were more like metal bowls, but it didn't matter. The burners on the commercial range distributed the heat quite evenly, and as long as the guy on the saute station pays attention and keeps things moving, nothing burns.