It’s beautiful
(midwest.social)
You Americans just can't get away from the corporate brainwashing no matter how hard you try.
"Hershey's cocoa powder", what the fuck? Not only is naming a specific brand for a recipe bad enough, naming the worst shit imaginable is so fucking weird.
Typically that just means there was some kind of endorsement deal with the company that made the recipes. I doubt this is an exclusively American phenomenon.
Perhaps the recipe calls for vomit flavored chocolate that other brands cant match.
Nah, it's the delectible combination of wax and vegetable oil.
It works for very simple recipes where the work can be summed up in a word or two. Complex recipes need far more instructional information not just the order to put ingredients together.
https://www.cookingforengineers.com/
Why is "mix" duplicated?
Mixing eggs in with fresh coffee and melted butter is a somewhat time sensitive action. If you don't get it mixed in in time, it can essentially cook, so it's best to do it deliberately.
My guess is to not overwork the eggs?
I love this. And to all the guys arguing whether this is a good way of designing a recipe, please remember you are on Lemmy, most people here are either it or engineers or at least very close to one of those professions so the amount of autism is significantly increased 😂
This isn't a recipe? Recipes have 40 paragraph long stories about how your grandmother fell in love in Rome .
and inconsistently labeled units
Or giving units by weight.
I understand it's more convenient if you have a kitchen scale because you can put everything in the same container, but not all of us has a kitchen scale and converting multiple ingredients from weight to volume is damn near impossible.
Why cups, tbsp, and tsp though. Use ml and mg
That makes sense if you like numbers that are easy to multiply and divide, but it depends on region. Some people aren't familiar with metric, and the recipes they write probably don't use it. In all likelihood, recipes you find in imperial units were likely written by an american.
The volume vs. weight thing though, that transcends region or systems of measurement. It assumes everyone has a kitchen scale, when most non-professionals have volumetric measuring supplies which are typically way cheaper
Or everything is in cups.
It's either that or I have to make little piles of dry ingredients on my table and it makes a huge mess.
And if I’m using my phone every other line has 50 ads
[ * ]Ublock origin master race[ * ]
Every time my wife or I look up a recipe we start singing "when I was a young warthog..."
Ok I don’t know where this is from but I want to start singing it out of context just to keep the mystery going.
It's the circle of memes...
I'm a sensitive soul, though I seem thick-skinned,
And it hurt that my friends never stood downwind!
I came here to ask, "where is the 20 page long family history that makes you get a RSI from scrolling down to see the ingredients" but this will do too
Here's an open source library for generating these from markdown https://mossblaser.github.io/recipe_grid/tutorial.html
This is pretty much useless unless the recipe is strictly additive. No room for "split a chunk of dough, we'll need it later". Or if you need to prepare two things in parallel before combining some but not all. Or indicating that a step can progress unattended.
https://mossblaser.github.io/recipe_grid/tutorial.html#splitting-recipe-components-up
someone figured out a way
Kinda breaks the elegance
Also an issue if you need to add an ingredient at more than one step. Suddenly you've got no good way of indicating the total amount you need for the recipe as well as the amounts for the individual steps. This is great for a specific kind of extremely simple recipe only.
I don't understand what this adds that the "traditional" recipe style is missing. I even see some things it's lacking. For example, the last 4 ingredients should be mixed together independently before folding in to the base.
I don't dislike this format, but I just don't see why it's so revolutionary.
If the last 4 ingredients need mixing together first, then you simply have a mix column with just those ingredient rows under the mix column from above to show that those get mixed independently in parallel. This recipe implies that is unnecessary for this food though.
It clearly shows the sequential and parallel threads of execution:
- up/down: parallel.
- left to right: sequential
It clearly shows the sequence of produced intermediate results, split and merging points:
- a row that splits into two rows is one step producing more than one result. Like spliting yolk and whites.
- many rows becoming one: merging node. Like baking many ingredients.
For example, the last 4 ingredients should be mixed together independently before folding in to the base.
Isn't that indicated by the combination of rows?
I like this chart. It even allows for ~~multithreaded~~ multi-person baking, because the combination of rows indicates where processes are merged (and need to be done).
Edit: I may be dumb. A mix step is missing below the mix block of the other ingredients, but it could easily be included.
Right, I was about to say that the big near-square in the middle bottom could easily be used to indicate this as a separate process. I really like this format!
Because it fits on a little card. Which everyone used to keep recipes on for a long time. Little boxes full of recipe cards.
Luckily most recipes won't go super wide
I guess it's just a revolutionary idea for those that didn't grow up in a time when we already did this. This is pretty much what all my recipes (inherited from my grandmother) look like today, just without the bracketing.
Its not as universal as you are suggesting here. I've seen it before but there are certainly no cards like this in the boxes I've inherited.
My wife said "But how will we learn their life story!?"
I'm not sure an excel chart is that much better than just saying "melt x, mix y, fold z and then bake" and the list of ingredients xyz.
But this way you dont have to”instructions”
You just list ingredients and whats done with them
Its not for the just-moved-out teenager who is cooking for the first time
But lots of recipes needs instructions to clarify why or how you should use certain techniques or ingredients and the like.
If it is not for everyone then it is not really an improvement.
Maybe it depends on the recipe. I'm all for rethinking them and going for a cleaner design. I'm also looking forward to the day that we migrate away from hillbilly units, so I don't have to search "xxx recipe metric".
Much worse. And it won't work for most recipes.
I once came across a cooking blog that used this sort of instructions over a decade ago; was apparently run by an engineer - haven’t found it again since, but the methodology stuck with me.
I believe www.cookingforengineers.com , but it’s either down or doesn’t like my VPN, so I can’t verify.
Yes I think the guy on that site invented the format. At least that's where I first saw it many many years ago .
Definitely not a VPN issue; I’m raw dogging the internet on my phone and also getting a Server 500 error.
Will bookmark to try and remember to revisit it at some point in the future. 😅
Seems to be back online. ¯\_(⊙_ʖ⊙)_/¯
You, and exactly as I remembered it - this is totally the same guy! 🤣
I want to know what this is a recipe for. I guess I'll just have to try it and find out...
This one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassi%E2%80%93Shneiderman_diagram
Maybe based.cooking should try it out
I've never seen anyone else do that, but that's how I began hand-writing recipe cards around a decade ago. Not as neat a table, but groups with arrows that combine down to a final step (so I guess more pyramidal in most cases).
how do you actually read it though
You melt the butter, then add the next 3 ingredients and mix everything, etc...
Top down and left to right.
How do I melt everything after the butter? Do eggs even melt? 🤔
You are seriously misinterpreting the chart, and I'm really not sure how you arrived at that interpretation to begin with....
Okay good. For a second, I thought I was going mad. To the previous poster, you only melt the butter. Reading goes left to right, top to bottom.
NIH syndrome strikes again.
("Not Invented Here" for those unfamiliar.)
What does "not invented here" mean in this context?
Recycling an idea of another domine and claiming it is original?
This is terrible - forces me to scan across and then forget what I'm looking at.
It's contrary to mis-en-place: ingredients listed first, then instructions.
My technical brain does like the visual, this just doesnt work in reality, especially as recipe complexity increases.
Huh, well, I think it's awesome. The ingredients are listed first if you just consult the first column. In your defense, I would absolutely be interested in seeing this format applied to far more complex recipes. The blank boxes could easily be used to fill independent simultaneous preparation, though. One could simply fill the cells as one works from left to right. This is awesome!
Yeah, from a computer science perspective, cooking recipes are just algorithms. And I'm pretty sure, they need to be "turing-complete" in that, i.e. you can't really put a general boundary on their complexity.
A particular case that you can't portray with this scheme, is loops. It doesn't happen a lot, but
- recipes
- can
- say
- "Repeat from step 1".
You could obviously work around it to some degree by writing e.g "Prepare 10 dumplings" and maybe list the steps for that separately below.
But yeah, there's going to be other complexities like conditions, e.g. "if you're doing the vegan version, mix in the agave syrup now".
...But I guess, there's also no law that forces you to use that scheme for all recipes. You can totally write it out in prose when the boxes start getting hacky.
A workaround for loops is to simply label every box A1, A2, B1, etc. and have it say "repeat steps A1-5" or whatever. You can also just edit the framework of the box entirely or use separate tables for totally independent parts. Anyway, I just dig the visual stacking lol.
I kind of suspect the people that don't agree with you don't cook often, at all, or are very amateur. It absolutely starts instructions at the top and LEAVES OUT those ingredients used for prep in the ingredient list. While this isn't a big deal for this recipe (extra flour and butter) this can be annoying when actually making something that requires different ingredients during prep.
Furthermore, I honestly don't see how you could use this format for anything beyond the most basic of baking recipes. I tried to think my way through writing a recipe for potatoes fondant in this format, and my mind started to melt thinking about to convey technique at each step. I also struggle to see how it's less complex to read than a traditional recipe format. Additionally, I fully agree that this recipe is going to result in misreading which ingredients go in each step, especially when you have to separately mix two separate sets of ingredients that are 10 or 11 columns out. It's just making a fairly simple list of steps way more complicated than necessary.
Maybe I'm missing something though. If someone has a more detailed explanation of how this style is supposed to work that would might be helpful. Otherwise it just seems sort of useless beyond cooking a box cake or a basic buttercream.
Mis-en-place format makes sense if you’re a professional or have adopted professional methods.
However, a lot of home cooks/bakers don’t prep everything first and instead grab as they go or “chunk” the recipe steps like in the image.
Preparing all the ingredients before starting is something you learn in school?
It refers to the setup required before cooking, and is often used in professional kitchens to refer to organizing and arranging the ingredients
That’s direct from Wikipedia and, yes, mis-en-place is taught in culinary schools.
You can certainly use it at home or even apply the principles outside of cooking.
However, I learned to cook in junior high home economics class and “mis-en-place” was not taught. I didn’t learn the term or its meaning until much later after adopting cooking as a hobby.
Unless a home cook has a strong interest in cooking as a hobby there’s lots of terms and techniques they wouldn’t likely know or apply. Think things like an aebleskiver or ~~tamagotchi~~ tamagoyaki pan.
Edit: autocorrect
