Quote from: bayleafthief on March 07, 2013, 11:22 PM
I've tried many different ways. In last nights effort I just put them in oil that had reached rather low heat, continiued with the low heat and stirred around. The low heat was due to burning the spices in previous attempts.

Yes, frying spices in hot oil can easily lead to burning if you're not careful, but frying them on a low heat to avoid burning isn't the answer either and would probably lead to the symptoms you describe.

There are a number of ways of frying spices in hot oil to extract their essential oil (which is where the flavour comes from) and which way they do it tends to be the one that works best for them or the one they feel most comfortable with.

Most people have adopted a method of frying spices in hot oil by adding them to a garlic/ginger paste and/or onion puree or even simply chopped onions. I fry mine in a garlic/ginger paste made with water for this reason and the water content stops the spices from burning or sticking to the pan when they're added.

When the oil separates from the fried spices and garlic/ginger puree mixture it's an indication that the water content has gone and if you continue to fry you'll risk burning your spices, so continue with the next stage of the recipe.

I'd suggest you might like to try this method, heating oil to hot (but not smoking) add your garlic/ginger puree mixture and fry till it just changes colour, add your spices and fry stirring all the time and just as the oil separates, add your next set of ingredients, usually a tomato puree watered down.

See if that gets you better results.

Can you describe how you're frying them? That might help pinpoint where you're not getting the results you expect.

Quote from: PaulP on February 12, 2013, 11:24 AM
The separation of the oil at the frying time, (so often described in Indian cooking books) and normally when a fry pan mixture contains tomatoes is due to water evaporating from the pan mixture. The evaporation of water prevents the oil from getting too hot but there comes a point when most of the water has gone and at this point the oil will start to get hotter than 100 degrees and you are entering a possible burn scenario. Most cookbooks will direct you to the next cooking stage at this point. It's not rocket science is it?

No it's not rocket science at all, but it seems to be for most of the people on this forum.

The answer you've given here is exactly the same as the answer I gave in the Glasgow thread that caused so much controversy - and was rejected as being wrong. So thanks for confirming my answer was 100% correct even if you didn't intend to.

Scum being formed of lipoproteins is a completely separate and largely irrelevant side issue.

Quote from: mickdabass on February 12, 2013, 11:01 AM...and I will generally surmise that it is clear to me that none of us have the definitive answer.

How are you surmising that and why is it clear?

Can you give me your reasons for why you feel no-one has given you the answer?

I've now given the same answer to this question in two separate threads. I have also stated that I know with 100% certainty that the answer I have given is 100% correct.

So far not one person has been able to refute it and not one person has been able to come up with a viable alternative over and above "I don't think that's right, or it's not the definitive answer".

You're more than entitled to you own personal opinion on this, you're equally entitled to reject my answer as being wrong as long as you give your reasons for why. What you can't do (as far as I'm concerned) is state that no-one has given a definitive answer, when I already have.

If you have any questions about it, I'm more than happy to answer them.

Quote from: Secret Santa on February 12, 2013, 06:13 AM
When you've made a base and left it to cool you've undoubtedly noticed that the oil layer increases (and covers the whole surface). This happens as the pan cools, so there's no evaporation as spicey claims and yet the oil continues to collect.

If the pan is warmer than the surrounding air temperature water evaporation will still continue.

Or do I now need to explain the scientific theory of water evaporation to you?

Quote from: chewytikka on February 12, 2013, 03:27 AM
Whoa, Late night, hic. this threads been trashed
ooko, after a years hiatus from posting, your back with the same idiotic attitude.
Asking the question why, then writing reams of rubbish on why you think whoever is wrong and you know better, when in reality your not even on first base.

Coming from someone that doesn't appear to understand that scum forming on the surface of base sauce is actually coagulated lipoproteins and not impurities created by boiling and oil separation (as you wrongly claim) you'll have to forgive me for ignoring any rubbish you continue (and have always) peddled on here.

It's quite unbelievable what utter nonsense some of you people come out with. But I can understand why they become hostile when they're shown up to be ignorant.

What utter rubbish:

Quote from: chewytikka on October 26, 2012, 11:23 PM
....because like any scum its the impurities created by the boiling process and in this case oil separation. It really is hard to believe some people think it has a value and a good taste.

It's got nothing whatsoever to do with oil separation and everything to do with:

Quote from: spiceyokooko on February 08, 2013, 08:31 PM
No it isn't, impurities that is.

It's actually coagulated lipoproteins, proteins combined with lipids (fats). Proteins when combined with lipids when boiled coagulate and have a lower density than oil and water and so float to the surface. The only effect they have on stock or base gravy is to make it cloudy. Given that base gravy is opaque anyway, they really don't make any difference whether you stir them back in or skim them off.

https://curry-recipes.co.uk/curry/index.php/topic,8956.msg89255.html#msg89255

And if you don't believe me, which you won't, because you're now in reputation damage limitation mode, (just like someone else in this thread) do a google search on it and find out for yourself what the correct answer is. Just to help you, the key words you want are scum and lipoproteins.

Quote from: Dajoca on February 12, 2013, 12:21 AM
Yet another thread destroyed with unnecessary bile and vitriol.

Yes, you're absolutely right in what you say and I must hold my hand up as being one of the main culprits - guilty as charged, for which I'm happy to apologise.

Sorry Martin for derailing your thread in this way.

Quote from: Cory Ander on February 12, 2013, 12:04 AM
Now that sounds plausible..... 

Don't you start!

Quote from: Secret Santa on February 11, 2013, 11:41 PM
When you actually explain the contradiction

It's not a contradiction, you just can't get your head round it. In other words you can't figure it out for yourself and need me to keep on explaining it to you.

Yet you've got the cheek imply I'm stupid?

The principle is exactly the same with the big stock pot of base sauce as it is with the frying pan, only this time the emulsion (water + oil) is only created on the surface. The water evaporates from the surface, the emulsion breaks and bingo the oil separates.

The water evaporation and emulsion breaking is only taking place on the surface - not throughout the entire stock pot of base sauce, which is why you can't figure it out, because you assume it's taking place through the entire stock pot. It isn't, it's only happening on the surface, where the water is evaporating from!

Stir that oil back into the base and it disappears (the emulsion has been broken) continue cooking it and more water will evaporate and the emulsion creates and breaks again. The oil that separates is only happening on the surface it doesn't extend down to the bottom of the stock pot.

When cooking in a frying pan, you only have a thin coating of sauce and the same thing happens only this time all the water evaporates breaking the emulsion and separating the oil.

Are you happy now?  :

Quote from: Secret Santa on February 11, 2013, 11:20 PM
I'm still waiting for an explanation as to why the oil separates from the blended base after continued cooking, when we know the water content is vastly more than the oil content (that's common sense, no science needed -  I hope)

You've already had this explanation now, twice.

If you don't understand it, fair enough, but I'm not going to keep repeating the same thing over and over. Particularly not something that I know with 100% certainty to be 100% correct.

So far you've come up with jack (moderated) to refute it, over above what you think to be common sense.

What's even more shocking, is someone who's been cooking this stuff for as long as you have to have zero understanding of the processes involved!