Best & Worst Food Magazine Web Sites?

[Fat Guy]

Here are some of the candidates (feel free to nominate others):

Food & Wine http://www.foodandwine.com/

Saveur http://www.saveur.com/

Gourmet http://eat.epicurious.com/gourmet/

Bon Appetit http://eat.epicurious.com/bonappetit/

Cook's Illustrated http://www.cooksillustrated.com/

[franklanguage]

Okay, so are those your picks for the best or the worst?

[Fat Guy]

Those are my picks for us to discuss in terms of which are good and which are bad -- those are all the major food magazine Web sites, as far as I know (though I'm sure others will supplement the list). I've thrown the topic out there, and now my intent is to look through the sites so I'll eventually have some opinions to offer.

[Jason Perlow]

technically speaking the food section of

marthastewart.com

is also a food magazine web site.

You gotta admit she threw a ton of money into the thing. Design speaking I really like the solid colors and monochromaticism.

[ChocoKitty]

Hey, what about Fine Cooking's website?

http://www.finecooking.com

[NewYorkTexan]

adding to the list:

Cooking Light

[=Mark]

Chile Pepper Magazine:

http://www.chilepepper.com/

[Steve Klc]

Should we consider this on two tracks--general and niche?

[Jinmyo]

Steve3, I think so. The list that Fat Guy (aka Steven Shaw, aka Hat Guy) provided are the standards most of us would agree on. (And can provide delightfully catty remarks about.)  While I might occasionally look at Chile Pepper, I would go blind before I cracked the cover of Cooking Light. When I see it in the racks, I avert my gaze lest I be struck down. Or strike first.  

[nerissa]

While this thread is nearly a year old, I was wondering if epicurious makes anyone else want to scream? Trying to have a decent and mature conversation about food on that site is like being the only Mets fan surrounded by bleachers of the opposing team--outnumbered and out-thugged. There are rational people on the site who actually know 2 wits about cooking, but I got fed up with checking out to see "The new Batch".

I find food and wine is limited in its navigation.

Edit: grammar, dear.

Edited February 11, 2003 by nerissa (log)

[tommy]

While this thread is nearly a year old, I was wondering if epicurious makes anyone else want to scream?  Trying to have a decent and mature conversation about food on that site is like being the only Mets fan surrounded by bleachers of the opposing team--outnumbered and out-thugged.  There are rational people on the site who actually know 2 wits about cooking, but I got fed up with checking out to see "The new Batch". 

I find food and wine limited in its navigation.

oh dear, i never knew they had a forum!

at any rate, that's why we're here.

[Fat Guy]

Epicurious has some great content buried within its pages but it's an amazingly scatterbrained and difficult-to-use site. And the forums, forget about it. Were it not rude, I'd go over there and liberate all the poor users who don't know about eGullet.

This is a good time to reopen this discussion. Most of the major food mag sites have been redesigned since we last visited this issue.

[tommy]

i use epicurious all the time as a recipe database and reference. it's basically the recipes that have appeared in the mags. some of which are good, and some of which are bad. it's interesting to search on something like "braised short ribs" and find out that they basically have 1 or 2 recipes a year, and they are often very different. i don't say this to imply that the content is bad, but rather to suggest that you'll get a lot of hits and you might end up having to come here to make heads or tails out of it all.

[NeroW]

I also use epicurious.com for ideas and general browsing. Being of limited means, I read a recipe from the printed versions of Bon Appetit or Gourmet and think: "hey, that sounds good, howsabout I go spend $100 on ingredients I'll only use once for a recipe that, for all I know, may not turn out?" It's then that I turn to epicurious. To read about other people's successes or failures, and sometimes to share mine. There is no comparison between the forums on epicurious.com and those here, however--they are hard to navigate and the people who frequent them are just not . . . it's just not on the same level. Also, the pop-up ads are atrocious and some of the reviewers are just plain mean and nasty.

I am not familiar with any of the other sites FG listed. I've tried Cook's Illustrated, but don't want to pay for the website when I already subscribe to the magazine. Cook's is a font of knowledge, but I have to draw the line somewhere.

[torakris]

Although I own probably about a hundred cookbooks, I often turn to Epicurious when I am wanting to use a specific ingredient. It is so much easier to type it in and read through the results then page through cookbooks one by one.

I never knew they had a forum, if it is anything like their reviews (which can be good and usually help me decide whether or not to make the recipe) that can become nasty and are full of people who do things like omit the 2 MAIN ingredients and then complain about how bad it was! Argh!

EDIT

I have to admit I have all the sites bookmarked, and they have been for quite a while (except the chilipepper one, but it is now!) but since discovering e-gullet I found I have very little need for them!

Edited February 11, 2003 by torakris (log)

[seawakim]

I use epicurious mostly for recipes. I like that some of them contain pictures and I appreciate searching by ingredient. Sometimes I read the reviews or pay attention to the "number of forks" a recipe has been given by the users, but I often have found myself to disagree with their assessment.

I find the site in general to be not easily navigated and loaded with too many pop-up advertisements.

[elyse]

Epicurious has some great content buried within its pages but it's an amazingly scatterbrained and difficult-to-use site. And the forums, forget about it. Were it not rude, I'd go over there and liberate all the poor users who don't know about eGullet.

This is a good time to reopen this discussion. Most of the major food mag sites have been redesigned since we last visited this issue.

Keep in mind, Fat Guy, if you do that, they might actually come here. I've never seen the forums there, but if they're anything like the reviews, I'd think twice about chit-chatting with them.

I do really like their "recipe box" but that may be because they were one of my first food sites and I had no idea how to cut and paste. I find them pretty easy to navigate. I think Martha's forums are incredibly lame, as are food tv's. Zzzzzzzzzz. Haven't been to the others in a long while, and I don't want to pay for CI.

[ruthcooks]

My complaint about recipe sites is that some of them make it impossible to copy the recipes...isn't that the point? Martha Stewart's site is near impossible, but Delia Smith takes the cake. Both print out boxes, pictures, etc. which result in a two page recipe with no way to edit. Food Network's is easy, but there are so many re-run shows that I find myself looking at the same recipes time after time in senior moments.

[thefoodhunter]

http://travel.discovery.com/fansites/great...greatchefs.html

for the best cooking show on TV with real working chefs.

[Robert Schonfeld]

If you like Cook's Illustrated, but don't want to pay, try this site for their television show, which has a lot of similar recipes.

[ronfland]

Dear Ruthcooks: I'm not sure what the problem is - but I have a ton of Martha's recipes printed out from the website. Martha has a "printer friendly" feature similar to FoodTV's.

I adore Martha, and subscribe to the magazine - but I'm not fond of her cookbooks. I use the website almost exclusively to obtain her recipes. I also find the advanced search capability on her site helpful. I generally search three sites all the time, Martha, Epicurious and FoodTV - I have to give some of the others that FG listed a try (I too have them bookmarked and have never used them).

[Cheffie3]

My top favorites are AllRecipe (not a magazine web site, but still a good source) and Epicurious, simply because it allows the readers/cooks the ability to give feedback on the recipes. I can just browse the recipes and count the numbers of stars or "forks" and decide if I should even bother preparing it. It's interesting to note that on Epicurious, most of the recipes with low ratings are from "Gourmet", which is why I don't subscribe to their magazine.

Edit: noted that AllRecipe is not a magazine site

Edited February 12, 2003 by Cheffie3 (log)

[ferdlisky]

I use Epicurious all the time as a recipe resource. I don't keep my Gourmets or BAs, since all the recipes since the late 80s/early 90s are on the web site (except for recipes from developers who keep the copyright to their recipes).

The reviews are a double-eged sword. If you can wade through the idiots (the ones who haven't made the recipe, but feel obliged to post a comment along the lines of "this is too fattening!", or the ubiquitous reviewers who change everything in the recipe and then bitch that it didn't turn out), there are usually a few good comments. The forums, by the way, are atrocious. I'm amazed anyone uses them.

My understanding of how Epicurious works is that although it is owned by Conde Nast, it is completely independent of the magazines, by which I mean the magazine's send the site their recipes and epicurious uses them as it sees fit. It is run on a complete shoestring. Hardly any staff at all.

[edited for sense. I hope]

Edited February 12, 2003 by ferdlisky (log)

[Rushina]

I think life changed for me the day i found Egullet. What other (if there are any) websites are out there worth checking out?

Rushina

[chezlamere]

www.passionateaboutfood.net

www.recipezaar.com

www.chef2chef.com

www.allrecipes.com

www.internationalrecipesonline.com

www.1worldrecipes.com

www.asiafood.org

these aren't mag's but they're interesting