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.
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.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 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.
Here’s an open source library for generating these from markdown https://mossblaser.github.io/recipe_grid/tutorial.html
I want to know what this is a recipe for. I guess I’ll just have to try it and find out…
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.
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…”
I’m a sensitive soul, though I seem thick-skinned,
And it hurt that my friends never stood downwind!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 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
My wife said “But how will we learn their life story!?”
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
multithreadedmulti-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.
Maybe based.cooking should try it out
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.
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.
Yeah, what if you want to do something like: “Seperate the yolks from the whites, beat the whites until they’re fluffy and then add sugar and mix with the rest.” And then a later step doing something with the yolks. I don’t see how you would do that here without it turning into an unreadable mess.
I like it as the shorthand at the end. Special instructions could still be included before it as usual.
It is totally possible. This is basically a dependency graph. Separating the yolks simply goes closer to the left, and it produces new ingredients (or data, if you want): yolks and whites. They move right to their own sequential processes.
Or you could just list them separately to begin with. “3 egg whites” and “3 egg yolks” on separate rows.
You could just list egg yolks separately from egg whites in the first place. But yeah I get your point, for certain more complicated recipes it will break down. At the cost of some readability I guess you could list products of earlier ingredients on the side, but then it’s no longer a list of what you need to start.
I think my ideal solution would just be regular recipes but have them actually list the measurements of things in the text. It’s very annoying to have to go back to the list especially when it’s on the other side of a page.
Or you could go the other direction and have a full graphical flow chart with some text in it, although I can’t imagine that being particularly space efficient
Yeah agreed, recipes could use something among the lines of “… And then add the sugar (250g)”
I feel like this is less useful for a recipe you’re making for the first time or make once in a while, but probably pretty handy as a quick reference for something you make regularly.
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⊙)/¯
