ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Professional Food Service Forums › Professional Chefs Forum › How do you feel about rustic presentation?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How do you feel about rustic presentation?

post #1 of 23
10/3/09 at 9:50pm
Thread Starter 
Just curious about the general consensus. Is there a place in fine dining for a rustic presentation?

What I mean by that is, for instance; on a steak seasoned with garlic, could bits of diced, half black garlic be left on after cooking for presentation or would Michelin Three Star diners be horribly offended.

I ask purely out of curiosity(having never even set foot in a restaurant with more than one Michelin Star) and the above is just an example.
Reply
post #2 of 23
10/3/09 at 10:23pm
To me their is nothing better than hight, small portions, and food in its most natural state. Thank God their are all kinds of people that like a full gambit of flare. It keeps us all in business. I give a touch of rustic a thumbs up. A china cap does have its rightful place in a kitchen though.
Reply
post #3 of 23
10/4/09 at 3:23am
Regional rustic is the key to a diners heart.

I was a classicist for a long time but found that an 8 - 9 item signature menu kept 'em coming back. The small menu allowed me to concentrate on perfection.

No towering presentations, no perfectly cubed stuff.

Three small vegetables to each entree, ( smoked cauliflower w/ shaved Manchego - carrot ribbons poached in balsamic and port, summer squash barrels stuffed w/ roasted beet mousse, etc. )

Oversize plates / wide rim - no garnish.
Reply
post #4 of 23
10/4/09 at 9:08am
Michelin, is not only based on cooking, it is based on originality of personal presentation,so as long as it also tast good why not, thats your name on it.!!
Reply
post #5 of 23
10/4/09 at 10:47am
If the garlic is black it's burned. Bad, bad, bad. Rustic is nice when done neatly, i.e. several ingredients mixed together and then neatly piled on a plate. It really depends on presentation, if it looks neat then fine, if not it's messy.
Reply
post #6 of 23
10/4/09 at 12:00pm
My thoughts exactly. Nothing worse that burnt garlic.
Reply
post #7 of 23
10/4/09 at 12:15pm
I recently spent 6 hours preparing a roulade of duck, duck stock and duck confit. To accompany the duck we were serving fondant potatoes, my veg chef pan-fried the potatoes to seal them prior to poaching in the duck stock. He used chopped garlic in the pan with the potatoes and burned the garlic. I made him throw away 40 fondant potatoes and start again; my point was that if I spend 6 hours on the duck I wouldn't accept burnt potatoes that take 30 minutes to prep. Attention to detail is the most important part of cooking, regardless of the level you work at, or the food you serve.
Reply
post #8 of 23
10/4/09 at 12:19pm
Thread Starter 
Not really black so much as browned and very dark at the edges. Perhaps I was a little loose in the description.
Reply
post #9 of 23
10/4/09 at 5:48pm
One thing is there shouldn't be anything on the plate that you can't eat. Black garlic would be a harsh taste, brown would be roasted. Rustic would be a roasted piece of meat with fresh whole herbs..............I think in some cases its ok for presentation to leave this on to show the method of roasting and herbs used....IMHO I still don't like anything on the plate that can't be eatten...............Bill
Reply
post #10 of 23
10/5/09 at 6:45pm
There is a huge difference between rustic and something slopped on the plate.
Reply
post #11 of 23
10/5/09 at 8:08pm
Thread Starter 
That's really the root of the question. Presentation that is intentionally rustic.

I'm not referring to shoveling stuff onto a plate and chucking it from the pass ala Awful Waffle but thoughtful presentation that is intentionally unpolished, because a better word escapes me.
Reply
post #12 of 23
10/6/09 at 7:13am
It's the way I serve food....$125pp on down....
Reply
post #13 of 23
10/6/09 at 10:11am
I feel allot of chef's try to achieve this, at least in the Chicago area and where i am now. The age old question "three baby carrots tied with scallion or four". this goes deeper and deeper. To me to use food and show it for the beautiful art it is. To show a garden of eggplant, tomato's, basil, and scallions in your presentation of eggplant Parmesan the dish. Food does have a natural beauty. Do i put a sauce within a sauce and pull with a toothpick for my artistic display on the plate, or do i drizzle both sauces for a rope display? Is this what you mean? I remember a chef i worked for at a holiday inn always talking about "asymmetrical and symmetrical types of garnishing" This is what i understand you to be talking about. These are words i haven't heard in a long time lol. Rustic as in asymmetrical. Below is a pdf you should check out. I found it on the net and thought it was interesting.

http://www.therestaurantschool.com/I...esentation.pdf


:D
Reply
post #14 of 23
10/6/09 at 10:15am
I believe the question should be is the food rustic and thoughtfully/elegenatly/cleanly presented or is the food and its presentation done in a way that it looks like it came off a camp fire?
Reply
post #15 of 23
10/6/09 at 10:49am
Ahhhh ya no campfire food in my place. I would serve some salmon en papiot, but would not wrap it in foil and throw it in the fire then serve. Also as stated above from someone . I would consider dark brown garlic "roasted", darker than dark brown to me would be burnt. Their is a fine line between the two. Once you cross it you can taste it.
Reply
post #16 of 23
10/6/09 at 1:19pm
I would consider DARK brown garlic to be burnt, to me once you pass the line of golden/milk chocolate in color you have gone to far.
Reply
post #17 of 23
10/6/09 at 2:58pm
Thread Starter 
I'm asking about, if this makes any sense at all, using the ingredients themselves to create the visual appeal of the dish. What comes to mind at the moment(because I've got one in the oven right now) is a roast quail with the only garnish on the plate being the carrots, shallots, potatoes, garlic, thyme, sweet onions, and celery from the bottom of the roasting dish.

No sauce flourishes, no deconstruction, no raw herbs gently gracing the top of the bird. Just food, as it came from the oven, and placed with artful purpose on the plate.

Sort of how my mom's dinners would look if she knew how to plate. :D
Reply
post #18 of 23
10/6/09 at 3:33pm
Ya i dont mind it at home but not a big selling point for me. People eat with their eyes. If it looks good they will try it. Alot of places do good with that though. applebees, fridays, or meat and potato type of places.
Reply
post #19 of 23
10/7/09 at 4:08pm
I agree with billyb and chefhow....If it can't be eaten, or isn't an ingredient, then don't put it on the plate. Food should look stunning and taste better. When food is stacked in silly little piles, I just think of all the fingers that have touched the food. Food should look like food!
Reply
post #20 of 23
10/8/09 at 11:29am

do you like this?

what about this is this too pilled up? This is a Charlie Trotter dish.
http://www.theworldwidegourmet.com/g...lishment/6.jpg
Reply
post #21 of 23
10/8/09 at 11:37am
imo, that's more than I might do, but there's not too much going on there, either. It looks stunning.
Reply
post #22 of 23
10/8/09 at 12:28pm

Its not really "pilled up" its a rolled and stuffed cabbage leaf that is standing on its end. And it is very visually appealing IMHO.
Reply
post #23 of 23
10/8/09 at 2:21pm
how about this too one is this stacked up? I am just kinda trying to get a feel for your terminoligy. I have been on this site about a week and can see that one word can mean many things to many people.:D
LL
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Professional Chefs Forum
ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Professional Food Service Forums › Professional Chefs Forum › How do you feel about rustic presentation?