On Sat, 29 May 2021 07:50:19 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Sat, 29 May 2021 07:37:26 -0400, Gary wrote:
>
>> On 5/28/2021 9:02 AM, jmcquown wrote:
>>> On 5/28/2021 12:56 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>>> Don't worry, Gary. I'm, still gonna keep the empty bottle on the
>>>> counter to feature it in my pictures just to keep you ****ed off.
>>>
>>> Awww, he's not biting. That chicken does look good!
>>>
>>> Jill
>>
>> Took too long for his photo shoot.
>> It's a cold dinner. Even the butter isn't melting on his deluxe mixed
>> vegetables.
>
>Actually, I gotta agree with Gary on part of that. First of all,
>though, I don't cook my dinner and leave it sit out for hours while
>I take multiple pictures of it. My policy is "no more than 20
>seconds in a photo shoot including plating". And that averages
>about 6.5 seconds in reality.
>
>That said, when I uploaded the photo (after I ate it) I DID think to
>myself that the chicken DOES look kinda cold. But it's not - It's
>at least 110F internally - re-warmed in 1,300W microwave at 25%
>power for 8 minutes. As the admin of the largest Animal Flesh
>Cooking forum on Earth, I have to have a keen eye for things like
>that. So consider that a +2 from a professional who agrees with you
>on the photographic evidence.
>
>As for the vegetables, they were piping hot 14 seconds previous to
>the photo, and only 7 seconds after applying the butter (and it may
>not have even been butter, but a "spread" instead <gasp>). So you
>really blew that one and score a -3 for that crack.
>
>You should have quit while you were ahead. You're like Pussy Katz
>and blab too much - You're both right about 2% of the time. Remember
>The Rule: Quality not Quantity. Try and work on that while &*I* work
>on my condescension skills (I promise I'll get better at this!)
>
>-sw
Ask them, theyre here. "You can stop saying that now. Thank you."
--
The other Dave Smith