Jim D.

@shain, do you mind telling the brand of tahini you use? (I realize you may use something not available in the U.S.) I was using one that I liked in a filling for chocolates (the sesame had been roasted, unlike many others), but the company had a recent recall for contamination, so I am reticent about using that one again.

The discussion of wood grain reminded me that Jin Caldwell demonstrated making wood grain transfer sheets at the 2017 eGullet workshop in Las Vegas. I asked other attendees if they had a video of her technique, and a video was posted on May 22, 2017, on the Facebook workshop page. It's difficult to find that particular posting in a very long "page," but I just found it again. Jin used a spatula held at an angle to make the chocolate (yes, she was using chocolate) as thin as possible. I had forgotten, but I tried her technique after returning home but had cracks (which she, of course, did not). The overall problem I have with making transfers is that you never know how they are going to turn out until it's too late. I tried posting a link to that video, but (maybe because it's in a "closed" group) it doesn't work.

I had exactly the same problems. I bought guitar sheets from Chef Rubber, the flexible ones. But anytime I added a second layer of cocoa butter (or even made a single layer a bit too thick), flaking began, and I almost gave up (still intend to try again this coming summer). I can't imagine airbrushing a layer on since it is so difficult to control the flow of cocoa butter from an airbrush, but I will give that a try as well. Anytime I have tried airbrushing a layer of white onto a purchased transfer sheet (to make colors like red show up on dark chocolate), that has also been a mess.

There is U.S. minimum for fat content in heavy cream, so I just assume that in grocery-store cream all corners that can be cut are cut and so go with that minimum. Not a very precise way to cook.

Peter Greweling's recipe calls for 400g cream, 400g praline paste, and 400g chocolate (in this case, milk). Depending on the consistency of the paste (which can vary a great deal), I also add a little cocoa butter to firm up the ganache. Your ganache will let you know if you have too much fat--it will separate and the fat will float on top. This can be fixed by adding more liquid. For a long time I found this illogical, but then I realized what should have been obvious all along, that the water and fat content do have to be balanced. One of the difficulties with U.S. cream is that much of the time the fat content is not specified, so it's a bit of a crapshoot.

I'm not sure this is what you are asking, but.... As I understand ganache, it always has some liquid (usually cream, but other liquids can be used) that must be emulsified with some sort of chocolate. If you want something that (1) has more nut taste and (2) can be inside a shell with crisp ingredients (such as a cookie), then gianduja is ideal because (1) there is no liquid to dilute its taste and (2) there is no liquid to soften the crisp item. It's all fat. A praline ganache will often use hazelnut praline paste, cream, and chocolate and requires emulsifying. A hazelnut gianduja will use hazelnut praline paste and chocolate, no emulsifying required.

Exactly my concern. I have a dehumidifer in the basement, where the chocolate packaging in stored (it's a DeLonghi). It puts out a considerable amount of heat. I don't think I would want one in my kitchen. I don't recall if your kitchen space has AC or not, but if it does, AC lowers humidity--but not all that dramatically. On a hot, humid Virginia day (when I try not to make chocolates but sometimes must), I can eventually get the house temp down to around 65F, but the humidity is more difficult to get below 50%. I never make caramel on days like that.

Here is a direct link to the video on Youtube. And many thanks to @pastrygirl for taking to time to make it.

I would fear that using a whisk to dissolve Mycryo (or for any other purpose in chocolate work) would introduce air bubbles into the shell or ganache, which, in the case of shells, can later pop into tiny holes and, in the case of ganache, can shorten shelf life. If I were still using Mycryo, I think I would use an immersion blender, keeping the blender beneath the surface of the chocolate/ganache. When employing such blenders, instructors like Kirsten Tibballs, Andrey Dubovik, and Melissa Coppel use tall, narrow containers for the purpose of diminishing the number of air bubbles.

What do you want to know? Have you tried it? The primary difficulty I experienced was getting it to dissolve readily. But it does the job. Using seed chocolate presents the difficulty of finding the unmelted pieces to remove from the bowl. I don't know how much chocolate making you do, but if you are doing an appreciable amount, you will want to look into the EZtemper, which is like Mycryo in many ways but easily melts into the chocolate for quick tempering.

I guess some of us are more careful than others. 😛

I think this would be a good spot to add a link to it. It was very helpful in my replacement of a wire.

I too make my own pear purée so that I can be sure they are ripe and can include a little of the pulp. I wasn't clear on test cuts. I don't actually cut. I have a knife with a tiny blade and I stick it into the ganache, first on the sides (which will be cut off eventually), and when they are firm, into the middle. When there is almost no filling on the knife blade, I know it's time--or I hope it's time! In my opinion, one time of replacing a wire makes all this obsession something completely justified, and I do not apologize for it. By the way, once you buy the extra frames for making little bars, you will have a whole new possibility for cutting everything in sight.

I know just what you mean. The pleasure of getting those perfect squares (after years of jagged pseudo-squares) cannot be overestimated. But it is balanced by dread of a broken wire. I've done it once (gianduja too firm), and now I watch and test the filling to be cut like a hawk (I also now add coconut oil to gianduja to keep it softer). Fortunately those many, many test cuts cannot be seen once enrobing takes place. How was the pear flavor in the caramel? Pear is so subtle that I can't help wondering how detectable it was.

Has anyone found transfer sheets that are opaque? If one uses white chocolate, colors will show up without a problem, but with milk or dark, the story is different. A few colors will work: white, orange, some yellows, some blues, some greens. But it's quite unpredictable, and the colors I most want (red, for instance) get quite muddy when used with a darker chocolate. It's even more frustrating because on websites that sell transfers, the reds appear vibrantly red no matter what chocolate they are on. Over the years I have been fooled again and again by this trick photography and ended up with disappointing results. The person who invents always-opaque transfers will make money. I expect that a background white layer is the answer but wonder why no manufacturer has done that (to my knowledge).

The chocolate doesn't usually set well (streaky, for example). But mainly it becomes viscous and very difficult to work with. Worst case: You fill a mold, turn it over to dump out most of the chocolate, and very little falls out. At that point it's time for drastic action. There are two remedies: raise the temp and/or add some warm, untempered chocolate. Raising the temp is the typical way of coping, but it's tricky to heat the chocolate enough to melt out some Type V crystals (so above 92.3F), but not so hot as to melt out too many.

I have had some difficulty with that and the silk. Two of the chocolates I regularly use become over-tempered easily, and I haven't yet found the perfect amount of silk for that situation--1% is too much.

Kerry, Do you have ideas on why this would be the case? Obviously living where I do makes humidity a real issue. I can get the % down somewhat with air conditioning, but it helps only so much.

To echo what Kerry said, the all-important Type V crystals are melting out until you get down to around 93F, so it's the last few degrees that are crucial to providing enough of those crystals. I find it takes very little seed (contrary to the directions of many people), and I don't add it until close to around 95F. But it has to be there (unmelted) for the final few degrees.

That foil is a very interesting idea. I looked at the Foilman site and did not see the thickness of the paper-backed foil. Could you describe approximately how thick it feels? How does it compare to regular foil (such as Reynold's)? I'm looking for something to cover chocolates in a box, and because I'm dealing with a custom size, regular candy pads won't fit. I would need something fairly rigid, or at least something that would not bend easily.

Perhaps you will find these ideas an unacceptable compromise or even cheating. But as @keychrispointed out, the release marks happen to just about everybody when molding bars. eGullet and other sites are filled with questions on how to fix the problem, and--as is usually the case with chocolate--one is never sure of what causes the issue. One "solution" is to give up and try to disguise the problem as much as possible. You could, for example, purchase molds with texture; then the marks won't be as visible. Or you could try decorating the bars to draw the viewer's eyes away from the imperfections. One simple example is a familiar technique when people are decorating the outsides of bonbons: with a paintbrush or toothbrush, fling colored cocoa butter across the molds in a Pollock-like design. Or if using colored cocoa butter offends you, you could fling a contrasting color of chocolate (milk or white). Splattering is another option, as is piping thin lines across the bars.

I use Felchlin Maracaibo (65%) as my dark chocolate, and I love it. Because of increasing customer requests for "all dark" or "mostly dark" (a request I cannot easily fulfill at this time because I have a wide range of customer tastes to satisfy, and many like milk, some are white devotées--and I do a very limited production by myself that doesn't allow for a lot of variety). But after Christmas is over, I plan an "all dark" assortment. I am looking for a dark chocolate to offer a contrast to Maracaibo, something probably in the 70% range (my impression is that most people who think they like dark, dark chocolate don't really when it gets much over 70%). Once before I tried Valrhona Caraibe as a darker chocolate, but it really isn't, and no one seemed able to tell any difference. I purchased a tasting sampler of many Valrhona darks but was not thrilled with any of them except Caraibe. I know many people swear by Manjari, but I don't recall in detail what I thought of it. I would be happy to offer a second Felchlin but am not familiar with other darks from that company (and now that AUI is the distributor for Felchlin in the U.S., their products are available only in large amounts-- and for this experiment I am interested in a few kilos, such as Chocosphere has available). Any advice and opinions would be most welcome.

Yes, the purchase of the remote is the of the many helpful ideas you provided when I was buying.

It's odd but the noise of the Fuji does not bother me. It sounds like a vacuum cleaner (and, unlike a compressor, is a more or less steady noise).

That's a possibility, but my setup does not allow for that option. In addition, I read somewhere that the strength of the air flow is diminished with distance.