Photo of your unpretentious food
Discussion
sherman said:
Im actual now wondering if taking a picture of your food at all is pretentious? 
Can showing off your food to random people on the internet be unpretenious as you are showing something off and which is the very definition of pretentious.?
No, because if the food is unpretentious it's not showing off. It's just showing others what you just ate, which in many cases, the consumer will be aware of it's low visual appeal and not expecting compliments.Can showing off your food to random people on the internet be unpretenious as you are showing something off and which is the very definition of pretentious.?
Pretentious is putting effort into presentation, whether you photograph it or not.
sherman said:
But who is to say what food is pretentious?
If you nicely arrange sausage and mash for instance does it then become pretentious?
Definitions will vary I suppose, but my definition is food that has had extra time/effort invested in it's presentation, to make it look better than it actually is.If you nicely arrange sausage and mash for instance does it then become pretentious?
It's acceptable in a restaurant as you're paying for it and you want it to look nice as it gives the impression the chef is clean/tidy and the food is properly cooked. But when you're just cooking for yourself at home, it really doesn't matter what it looks like or what it is.
Super Sonic said:
'would do', if I was predisposed, not 'does'!
It is a reference to the wide open spaces on the plate, although I will admit that when I have run out of little plates, I sometimes have a cupola bits of toast on a big plate. Will post a pic nextime.
You use a plate for toast?!It is a reference to the wide open spaces on the plate, although I will admit that when I have run out of little plates, I sometimes have a cupola bits of toast on a big plate. Will post a pic nextime.
sherman said:
I assume you threw that from the other end of the kitchen to achieve that presentation.
Nah, the cod kind of fell apart when I picked it up so it just got dumped on top of the potato. Using tongs to pick up fish usually has that outcome. Saved me the job of cutting it up with cutlery so I count it as an efficiency.Patio said:
I'm sure it tastes nice
I'm intrigued in how you cooked this? Slow cooked? Is there a base sauce/stock in there?
Might have looked better on a coloured plate?
All chucked in a large pan. Fried for a bit, then flavourings and tinned tomatoes added. Then on a low heat for about 40 mins. It makes about 4 portions.I'm intrigued in how you cooked this? Slow cooked? Is there a base sauce/stock in there?
Might have looked better on a coloured plate?
I do very similar versions but using chicken or beef mince instead of pork. The lentils was a Jamie Oliver tip to bulk something up without altering the taste. And as you can see, you don't (necessarily) need to prepare anything else to have with it.
dickymint said:
In a basket with chips then agreed.
Cockles are certainly unpretentious. As are crab-sticks......proper ones that don't contain crab
Correct. Cockles are amazing and don't need to be delicately scattered around a plate of decorative salad to be enjoyed. They go in a small bowl or even stay in the bag/pot they were bought in, bit of a S&V and dig in. Cockle sandwich/roll is also very good.Cockles are certainly unpretentious. As are crab-sticks......proper ones that don't contain crab
Gassing Station | Food, Drink & Restaurants | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff