Food photography is actually a specialized discipline, often dealing with how to visually recreate food with something else entirely so it shines a little brighter or can withstand longer...
Food photography is actually a specialized discipline, often dealing with how to visually recreate food with something else entirely so it shines a little brighter or can withstand longer photography sessions without falling apart.
There's actually two subdiscipline depending on whether the picture is used in an advertisement setting or not. Some countries have legislation were the food depicted have to be edible. That...
There's actually two subdiscipline depending on whether the picture is used in an advertisement setting or not. Some countries have legislation were the food depicted have to be edible.
That doesn't mean that there's no "trick", for instance in an hamburger you may sear only one side of your steak, pipette your cheese and hand-place all of the sesame seeds...
In TV and cinema, indeed you may need to replace food stuff with non edible alternative, because your ice cream will definitely melt after your fifth take.
There's a whole class of dishes that can be reduced down to "undefined brown goop" that are reminiscent of various stage of diarrhea (currys, butter chicken, some blended soups). I Unusual shapes...
There's a whole class of dishes that can be reduced down to "undefined brown goop" that are reminiscent of various stage of diarrhea (currys, butter chicken, some blended soups).
I Unusual shapes or texture generally elicit a negative reaction (see century eggs above, but also natto).
However I think most dishes can made visually more appealing by choosing an appropriate soft lighting (for instance by placing your dish next to a window on an overcast day), and plating it nicely (have pretty dishes helps, and so is the unnecessary piece of herb on top of the dish ).
With all that being said, and with the caveat that I personally don't like it (but I'm going by sheer popularity)...
I will nominate the Filipino Balut. Because you'll need an epic amount of set dressing to make a partially developed chicken embryo look good (especially if it's on a late stage of development).
I’ve always thought the yolk looked disgusting whether in photo or in person — and I grew up eating it. But I find the egg “white” beautiful and gemlike.
I’ve always thought the yolk looked disgusting whether in photo or in person — and I grew up eating it. But I find the egg “white” beautiful and gemlike.
I make scrambled eggs every morning that I find delicious. I took a picture of it one morning and was horrified to notice that it just looks like a plate of vomit in the photo despite looking...
I make scrambled eggs every morning that I find delicious. I took a picture of it one morning and was horrified to notice that it just looks like a plate of vomit in the photo despite looking normal in real life. Better lighting probably would've gone a long way, but after the first picture I was demotivated from trying anything else.
Curry tends to look like brown goop in pictures. Well, brown curries - red or green thai curries for instance look fine in photos.
Most Cajun food other than Jambalaya. Etoufeé, gumbo, dirty rice. These are rarely photogenic, but so delicious.
Any soup that is not in a transparent broth tends to look pretty gross. Also most blended things; deviled ham comes to mind particularly.
Food photography is actually a specialized discipline, often dealing with how to visually recreate food with something else entirely so it shines a little brighter or can withstand longer photography sessions without falling apart.
There's actually two subdiscipline depending on whether the picture is used in an advertisement setting or not. Some countries have legislation were the food depicted have to be edible.
That doesn't mean that there's no "trick", for instance in an hamburger you may sear only one side of your steak, pipette your cheese and hand-place all of the sesame seeds...
In TV and cinema, indeed you may need to replace food stuff with non edible alternative, because your ice cream will definitely melt after your fifth take.
There's a whole class of dishes that can be reduced down to "undefined brown goop" that are reminiscent of various stage of diarrhea (currys, butter chicken, some blended soups).
I Unusual shapes or texture generally elicit a negative reaction (see century eggs above, but also natto).
However I think most dishes can made visually more appealing by choosing an appropriate soft lighting (for instance by placing your dish next to a window on an overcast day), and plating it nicely (have pretty dishes helps, and so is the unnecessary piece of herb on top of the dish ).
With all that being said, and with the caveat that I personally don't like it (but I'm going by sheer popularity)...
I will nominate the Filipino Balut. Because you'll need an epic amount of set dressing to make a partially developed chicken embryo look good (especially if it's on a late stage of development).
It's also a matter of platting, if you go to a Michelin restaurant they can make anything look good, it's an art.
Century egg maybe? Looks unappealing, maybe even otherworldly. Tastes pretty delicious, goes well with congee.
I’ve always thought the yolk looked disgusting whether in photo or in person — and I grew up eating it. But I find the egg “white” beautiful and gemlike.
I make scrambled eggs every morning that I find delicious. I took a picture of it one morning and was horrified to notice that it just looks like a plate of vomit in the photo despite looking normal in real life. Better lighting probably would've gone a long way, but after the first picture I was demotivated from trying anything else.
The photo: https://imgur.com/a/gAkN5bv I swear they were light, fluffy, brightly colored in real life.