Topic: fat droplets and spice frying

[JerryM]

seriouseats.com is regular that i quite like.

thought this link on frying curry might be of interest. skip to the section, "How do I know my curry paste is toasted sufficiently?" the shallots bit not worth reading.

i don't feel the information improves on what we already know - ie singe and quench.

i feel i've edged back since Zaal towards caution at the spice frying stage preferring to under fry rather than burn. i may just have to give it another try to see if i can spot those "fat droplets" and quench before burn.


http://www.seriouseats.com/2012/10/ask-the-food-lab-on-sizing-shallots-and-frying-curry.html?ref=title

[tonybatty]

I also visit the site regularly they have some interesting stuff.  But they are definitely behind the times still working in volumes ie cups rather than weights, preferably grams, modern quality US cookbooks are starting using weights in their recipes.  Maybe we need to do the same for the recipes on this site!

I also think they are getting their SI and US units mixed up: it takes 1 Joule to raise 1 gram of water by 1 C not F.  Also whilst strictly speaking the example at the end is true, at least adjusted to take account of the proper units they forget that in practice we usually have the oil in a reasonably heavy pan.

[Peripatetic Phil]

I also visit the site regularly they have some interesting stuff.  But they are definitely behind the times still working in volumes ie cups rather than weights, preferably grams, modern quality US cookbooks are starting using weights in their recipes.  Maybe we need to do the same for the recipes on this site!

Your motivation may be good, Tony, but I fear that if we did what you half-jokingly recommend, we would be sacrificing accuracy at the altar of SI-worship.  When I write, in one of my recipes, "1 teaspoon Bassar Curry Masala", I mean just that -- I have no idea whether my teaspoon contains 5gm, or 6, or even 7, so there is no point my pretending that I do.  Despite the fact that I do have both electronic scales and a mechanical balance, the latter capable of resolving down to 0,1mg, I use neither when making a curry.  I use a teaspoon, a desertspoon, a tablespoon, and only for liquids needing 100ml or more do I use a calibrated measuring jug.  So from my perspective, by stating the actual quantities I use, in the units in which I use them, I am doing my best to communicate the facts to the best of my ablility; if I were to coerce everthing into SI, I would be reporting fiction rather than fact.  And yes, I do weigh my onions, garlic and ginger, but solely in Imperial units : 2lb onions, 2oz garlic and ginger.

** Phil.

[tonybatty]

Like you and I suspect most cooks, I'm not an obsessive user of scales for recipes I'm familiar with, the exception being baking, but when I'm trying a new recipe, I do tend to stick to the measurements to try and get the taste/balance that the author achieved. I think you can only do this with weights.  I may subsequently change the proportions to suit my taste but that's the nature of cooking.

As a novice to this site and the recipes, I do worry a little that I get the smaller volume measures wrong which then detrimentally affect the taste. With modern scales its doesn't t really matter whether its SI or Imperial, its only a button press away.

[StoneCut]

I understand that it's much easier to use volumetric proportions but IF all the recipes here were using actual weights then they would scale much easier and reliably.

One should note that "1 teaspoon" or "1 tablespoon" can be a variety of things. I have two different sets of measuring spoons, for example. One is a set I bought from IKEA and the other is a US kit. They are VASTLY different in volume. I'd say that the US tablespoon is roughly 1.5x the IKEA measuring tablespoon. Other people just use a "real" tablespoon which doesn't hold near as much as any of my measuring tablespoons, for example.

I'd love for the recipes here to use grams instead. I'll try and rewrite some of the recipes here to use weight for myself next time I make them.

[Peripatetic Phil]

I'll try and rewrite some of the recipes here to use weight for myself next time I make them.

Isn't that at the very heart of the problem ?  You cannot (it seems to me) reliably convert someone else's volumetric measurements into weight/mass, simply because you have no idea how large or small his/her tea/desert/tablespoons are . . .

** Phil.

[Secret Santa]

When I write, in one of my recipes, "1 teaspoon Bassar Curry Masala", I mean just that -- I have no idea whether my teaspoon contains 5gm, or 6, or even 7, so there is no point my pretending that I do.

Seems to me Phil that if you (or anyone else for that matter) are going to go to the not inconsiderable trouble of sharing your creations with the masses then it does an injustice to yourself not to represent your recipe accurately, as is clearly the case at the moment. How hard would it be to purchase a set of standard metric spoon measures. They're available in most pound shops for the princely sum of...ummm...a pound!  ;D

[JerryM]

tony,

well pleased to find a fellow seriouseater. the "American" nature is something i too have to count 10 on. they talk far too much too.

on the wt v volume. until i can turn a high spec scale into a need i'm stuck using plastic measuring spoons for anything less than 10g. it's often a real annoyance this juggling act between wt and volume. far worse for me than imperial and si units.

the key thing i've taken from the article is this cliff hanger which i'd always knew existed but never really understood why. from the Zaal outcome i started taking what i thought was the singe too far and have pulled back to timing it when the water has just gone.

whether you can actually pick out "fat droplets" as a guide i doubt - i'm certainly going to look out for them when i next cook. some kind of sign which exists before the smell (which is too late) would be really helpful. i also want to try and get a clearer view of the timing when oil fully separates. i tend to run the frying on instinct and would if possible like to build just a little science back in.

i do feel for some dishes i have got more taste on pushing the singe but so does the lack of consistency.

[Peripatetic Phil]

Seems to me Phil that if you (or anyone else for that matter) are going to go to the not inconsiderable trouble of sharing your creations with the masses then it does an injustice to yourself not to represent your recipe accurately, as is clearly the case at the moment. How hard would it be to purchase a set of standard metric spoon measures. They're available in most pound shops for the princely sum of...ummm...a pound!  ;D

I have such a set, but I rarely use them.  What seems to be being overlooked is that all of us cook (a) for pleasure, and (b) for ourselves; it is little effort to report what we have actually done, but if it is made unreasonably onerous by requiring members to  (for example) use calibrated measuring spoons, and to ensure that each spoonful is accurately flattened so that we can be reasonably confident of the weight of the contents, then there will be far fewer recipes published (for example, I would not publish any more).  I believe that we should share what we do (which is, in my case, to use whatever spoons are to hand, and to use "a rounded" measure -- I have no idea to what weight that corresponds, nor do I really care), and it is then up to others to decide whether they want to try to replicate the recipe or just give up because it is all far too vague . . .

To recycle a hackneyed trope, "this is cookery, not rocket science".  As Chef Ajoy Joshi wrote --

Learning 'how much' teaches you one dish; learning 'how and why' teaches you, or opens up the doors of, the entire cuisine. [...]

** Phil.