You knew this would provoke a response from me Phil, so as it's now removed from the topic it was posted too.....

Presentation of food is very important to me just as the taste and smell is too. That doesn't mean food has to be presented in a Michelin Star kind of way but if it doesn't look very palatable your unlikely to truly enjoy eating it. I am perhaps fussier than some but that is my prerogative to be so.
But to answer the point raised by Spicey, for me the argument is not so much does it matter what a bhuna looks like in the context of the thread it originated, rather that, is the bhuna still a bhuna when it's swimming in sauce? Because that is what I feel people were discussing.
The Indian Garden offers Karahi Chicken that is cooked and served in the Karahi. The dish consists of quartered half onions, same again in red and green peppers and tomatoes, fried bhuna style in a very lightly reduced and minimal sauce. When I speak to Bangladeshi/Indian people about this, they often agree that this is how a good karahi should be. Yet most restaurants seem to cook chopped onions and peppers in a frying pan with loads of base and transfer to karahi before serving. The two are completely different dishes and I would argue the latter is not a karahi just because it is simply served in the metal vessel. I would even go as far to say that modern karahi and bhuna dishes look the same!