/ck/ - Food & Cooking★

>>11377

Are you cooking in a fucking high school locker?

"Charcoal smoker" sounds like some chick who blows black guys. I'm going to use this term along with "Coalburner" now.

Maybe I'm missing it, but how does a mint tisane increase the caffeine?

Did you keep the oil? Whenever I fry seafood I drain, cool, and throw away the oil and wash all my fishy cookware asap.

It's how it is with deep frying food in your home. Main reason why I got an outdoor propane burner to use for deep frying and stir fry. Keeps all the funk outside. Great for bringing a big pot of water to a boil as well.

Brownies could be made in a cast iron skillet to good effect. I would suggest a caramel sauce and slicing into wedges.

If you really want a sandwich, for whatever reason, I would suggest pan-toasting two pieces of bread in butter, flipping, putting some bittersweet chocolate on one piece of bread…. cover, allow the chocolate to melt. Pull the bread out of the pan, smear cream cheese on the other piece, smoosh together (cheese to chocolate).

This will work better with a dense crumb white bread, like "italian" as opposed to Wonder bread or any of the similar squishy big brands… unless they are well toasted to stiffen the crumb. Whole wheat breads would be problematic, I expect.

Honestly, I think you would be happier walking down to the corner store, buying a chocolate hand pie and microwaving it for a few seconds.

If you wanted to try and improvise a hand pie out of bread, that might have potential. Not sure if it would be better to use two pieces or one piece folded on the diagonal. Either way, that is a definite job for Wonder bread. Take a Milky Way bar, chop up about half of it (1/4 for a single slice), sprinkle on the bread. Either top with another piece or fold in half. Trim crusts, press edges together with a fork to make a pocket sandwich. Toast in the frying pan. Flip it often.

Please learn to do proper paragraphs, they do make your message look like a human being wrote it rather than a redditor.

>What is the difference between those 2 techniques?

I think the main difference is going to be taste with these two. I'm no expert in chocolate preparedness but I imagine the texture is going to be more or less similar and the use of honey and butter vs cream is going to leave a taste difference. If you're new to cooking with chocolate go with the double boiler technique as it gives you better control over the temperature.

>And do i need to add sugar is the chocolate is 70% and it is dark?

Yeah.

>or does the milk/cream make it not bitter?

If you're doing that method it would make it less bitter, but you could always add sugar if it doesn't meet your desires. Don't for get that cooking is all about experimentation, a recipe isn't set in stone and you are allow to improvise along the way.

>>11211 (OP)

>What is the difference between those 2 techniques?

One uses a double boiler. The other one is easier, but creates a slightly lower quality ganache.

> And do i need to add sugar is the chocolate is 70% and it is dark?

If you are starting with "eating" chocolate (as opposed to baking chocolate), you don't need to add sugar. Check the ingredients on your chocolate… if there is sugar in there, you don't need to add any. I would normally go with about 3 or 4 parts bittersweet or dark chocolate to 1 part semisweet or milk chocolate anyway.

> or does the milk/cream make it not bitter?

Unsweetened chocolate is going to be bitter, but the fat and sugar (lactose) in the milk is going to make your tongue not care so much. Softens the edge a bit; eliminates that tongue-drying intense bitterness and leaves a mild pleasant bitterness in its place. Thank goodness you can taste test as you go.

Chocolate is finicky about extra moisture; be quite careful to keep the steam from the double boiler out of the top bowl. This is the main advantage for the method of pouring hot cream onto the chocolate and melting with residual heat - not likely to drip water in. Downside is that with the typical proportions, it's a quite soft ganache, requiring chilling to keep solid.

>>11212

>>11213

>Lower quality

As in taste, texture or something else?

What i am not sure is about the use of honey, butter and milk while the other just uses heavy cream, how would the taste or texture differ using one or the other?

The chocolate couverture is dark but does have sugar in it so i hope it wont need.

What i mainly want to make is a silky dark chocolate ganache to dip profiteroles in it, so i will be putting it in the fridge so it wont be ultra liquid at the end.

What things do you use to make a ganache silkier and more smooth in general? And does the usual 1:1 cream/chocolate produce ganache that thickens in the fridge? Similar to a soft cream, not something really thick or really liquidy

>>11214

>What i am not sure is about the use of honey, butter and milk while the other just uses heavy cream, how would the taste or texture differ using one or the other?

Milk has had much of the butterfat removed.

Butter is just butterfat (plus maybe a touch of salt).

Cream is a mix of butterfat and milk, but it's hard to control the ratio.

By using the butter and milk separately, you should be better able to control the consistency and texture of the end product - easier to make it a bit thicker, for example. Adding honey should obviously add sweetness.

>>10830

>not drinking pure ethanol

>>11174

ha I remember how only a couple years ago everyone has been shilling palm oil as the most healthy oil to fry shit on

>>10812 (OP)

Tried it, it tastes fuckin' fantastic.

>>11174

>It follows an EFSA report which said palm oil contains high levels of contaminants at very high temperatures.

What are people even making with it that it's at a "very high" temperature?

This guy seems pretty good.

Nice that he tells you how to adjust the respies for townfolk.

Scott Rea's channel is fucking brilliant if you've ever found yourself wondering what the fuck to do with half a cow

>>11420

Tying off the sausages was beautiful.

Totally worth watching through it.

>>11072

Alot of bottled waters do taste different

>>10976 (OP)

>autistic ayy lmao

>Better than Scalfanikino

a lotta drama for something so simple tbh

He's OK.. for ASMR that is :)

>>11072

So people can know which water is best.

>>11062

you're thinking of a henagon, which is distinct from a circle.

>>11063

the corners are for sauces though, like an apollonian gasket with garlic

I cant find any recipes because i keep getting mocha and coffee recipes instead of chocolate recipes

Ok, I just realized that I probably answered the question less helpfully with the chocolate syrup idea.

Now that I understand that you're trying to make a chocolate confection, probably a molded chocolatw or possibly a truffle…

There we go. Truffles would work extremely well for this. Aim for a truffle.

To get the coffee flavoring, best results will likely be returned with a cold extraction. Not sure how much you want to make, but you basically take about a cup of regular ground coffee, about two cups of cold water, combine and stir. Place in refrigerator for 24 hours. Drain, saving liquid - press on coffee grounds to extract more liquid (think cheesecloth ball and twist). If you want to get all fancy about this, look at a Toddy coffee kit - they make some marginally specialized hardware to make coffee this way. This turns out a highly concentrated coffee; either dilute with hot water to get "regular american style coffee", or use in cooking or baking like you would espresso… except with way less bitterness.

I would look at the basic truffle recipe, plus a tablespoon or two of this coffee.

That would be a pound of shaved or chopped chocolate, a cup of heavy cream… boil cream, pour over chocolate, stir with whisk, stir in the coffee and a dash of vanilla extract, then form into balls, dust, and chill.

The dust is usually powdered sugar or cocoa powder or a mix of the two. I would suggest a ratio like 1 teaspoon of turkish grind coffee to 1 tablespoon of powdered sugar to 2 tablespoons of cocoa to make the dust for these.

>>11127

You can flavor the cream with coarse grinded coffee so you dont have water in your truffle.

>>10784

Girls discuss recipes on Pinterest, not /ck/.

>>10786

Shitlord bigot! I'll have you know I'm a proud demi-dimensional proto-queer bivalve and my pronouns are Che/Cher!

>>10771 (OP)

Throw it all away, I don't want hillary clinton prion disease

>>10788

pffptpfft what?

>>11039

>not being more fucking weeb and eating cooked rice with raw egg and soy

>>9059

Tbh i like this craker, weevil just an extra protein. Bet you never eat insects

faggot

>>11046

I've actually done this a couple times, it's not too bad but I stopped because I fear salmonella. Yes I know the chance is minute when eating pasteurized eggs.

My local kbbq place gives out three bins of dipping things: some sweetened sauce, seasoning-salt-and-oil, and seasoning salt (the seasonings aren't anything like Lawry's, though).

Dipping brisket always put too much salt on the meat, but dipping chopsticks in salt and then picking up a mouthful of meat worked fine.

gooks r bad

>>10247

>how to cook everything

author? magnet link?

>>10248

>Julia "Howling Cow" Child level entertainment

yeah, but that's cozy as fuck. we're not all looking for a culinary messiah you insufferable elitist

>>11040

Try watching "Good Eats".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Good_Eats_episodes

>>11040

Of course.

What do you want to eat?

If you're not sure, that's fine…

I would suggest learning to make tamago gohan (egg on rice) and omelettes first. Easy, quick, quite satisfying, reasonably hard to screw up, no exotic ingredients or extremely specialized equipment required.

After that, find something that interests you and work on it. If it goes horribly wrong, you can always fall back on your basics - whip up an egg on rice, not starve, and try to figure out what went wrong.

Depending on your goals, your next step along the path will be different. If you just want to not starve, you go for Betty Crocker or similar recipes. If you want to become a good cook, maybe a bit snobby but AT LEAST YOU HAVE STANDARDS, DAMMIT… then you start with something more advanced and thorough.

The dangerous trap: following the instruction offered by a popular celebrity chef and thinking it is good when it isn't. If their goal is to help you appreciate good food, great. If their goal is to sell you their line of kitchen gadgets and seasoning blends, their instruction may not actually be helpful.