Most recipe websites these days are horrible (poor layout, annoying popups/popovers, crazy amounts of content that have little or nothing to do with the recipe....). The minimalism of this website is refreshing. I only wish the website itself was also open source. It would be pretty cool to be able to collaborate on and enhance the site (and a SCM hosting platform like GitHub or GitLab would provide a built-in way for maintainers to evaluate new recipe submissions, etc.)
I have been thinking about how to solve this problem a lot lately. With the pandemic, I have been learning more recipes at home. I too share the frustration of browsing a recipe website and then getting a 7 paragraph story behind it. Just give me the recipe!
Cool! Looks fun. What exactly is open source on the site? Is it the recipes? If so, then what license do they use? Is there any disclaimer of that on submission?
I'm not dissing, just making sure your ducks are in a row. It's a fun idea!
The basic directions (beat egg, stir in vanilla, etc) are part of the recipe. The courts have ruled that there must be substantial content to make it copyrightable. That, along with ads and the need to "drive engagement" is why most recipe sites have long articles around the list of ingredients.
The basic directions (beat egg, stir in vanilla, etc) are part of the recipe. The courts have ruled that there's need to be substantial content to make it copyrightable. That, along with ads and the need to "drive engagement" is why most recipe sites have long articles around the list of ingredients.
"A recipe is a statement of the ingredients and procedure required for making a dish of food. A mere
listing of ingredients or contents, or a simple set of directions, is uncopyrightable. As a result, the
Office cannot register recipes consisting of a set of ingredients and a process for preparing a dish." https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf
So as someone who cooks a lot, and gets frustrated by long blog like posts that lots of recipes have this day, this website is probably even less useful for me.
The tagging system isn't being used correctly, Ham Sandwich is tagged with Banana for some reason. Speaking of Ham sandwich some of the recipes are just way too simple, this just tells me how to assemble a sandwich which I don't think anyone really needs.
Those are issues that can be solved long term, the other thing that will cause a problem long term is once this site starts getting repeat recipes. The blog like start to recipes may be annoying, but at least it sometimes helps you understand the decisions different people make for their recipes, or suggest substitutions/modifications.
Edit: The Spaghetti Carbonara recipe actually has multiple mistakes. it says the cook time is 0 minutes, it tells you to add the beaten eggs but never tells you to beat them, the recipe includes butter as an ingredient but the recipe tells you to heat the oil, and never says to grate the cheese. If this was a wiki or something I could try to fix those issues, but as it currently is I don't see any way to even flag it. It's also tagged as Banana and Greasy.
I'm building a search engine for this exact issue - there's 10000 recipes for every dish but they have to be contextualized: Do I want mac and cheese in the next 30 minutes or am I serving this for Thanksgiving? Those are 2 different experiences and recipes.
Even the base issue of at least ranking recipe blogs by quality isn't solved by other aggregators such as Google / Yummly which are more of a recipe dump.
If you or anyone else is interested I'm planning to release a version in the coming weeks - email is in profile.
My unsolicited advice: try to split up basics, common-recipes and specialties.
Basics are "how to bind soup", "choosing and cooking pasta", or "frying onions". Common recipes are then "bound vegetable soup" or "maccharoni with tomatosause (and fried onions)". Specialities would be those recipes you try for christmas, or when the in-laws come over next month.
It's highly frustrating to find a recipe that says "bind the soup with starch" without going into how to do this (or even worse: what ingredients this needs!). But for someone more experienced, it is highly frustrating to have to read through five lines explaining how to fry the onions.
As with most education, cooking is layered: you build on top of existing knowledge, without repeating it each and every time. I presume this is partly a classification issue and organisation challenge. You don't want "how to bind soup without milk or eggs" to turn up when someone is searching "vegan tomato-soup". The web has hyperlinks, which would probably be a very good way to organize recipes.
> The Spaghetti Carbonara recipe actually has multiple mistakes
One of them being that it's called "Spahetti Carbonara".
Separately, the recipe calls for whole eggs rather than egg yolks. This is a somewhat contentious issue, and many chefs have opinions one way or another. This recipe appears like it's The Definitive Spa(g)hetti Carbonara, but doesn't acknowledge that many consider it to be incorrect.
For me this is an issue with all recipe sites – my level of cooking ability, my ingredient preferences, how "authentic" I want to be, opinions I've formed on particular dishes – these are all very personal to me and unlikely to be fully represented in recipe sites.
I've started keeping my own recipe collection comprised of recipes I've made and enjoyed, I make no attempt to make them publishable, and I edit them as much as I feel necessary.
I think it is a bit less of an issue for normal cooking site, where it may say “Bob’s Spahetti Carbonara”. Whether it is authentic or not doesn’t really matter.
Whereas a site like this I reckon would aim for having definite versions of recipes, which is a) I think impossible for any dish and b) pretty much useless if you don’t happen to live in the exact region where it is from.
E.g. I have 3 different versions of the recipe for a Finnish blueberry pie. The original (well nothing original about it, just how my mother learned to make it), a Swiss version and a Colombian one. Because for the latter two I need different substitutes for the filling and slightly different measurements and baking time over all.
For me, recipe sites are just a starting point and inspiration for the personal collection. And I prefer having many different versions, some traditional, some sacrilegious available to compare and try rather than trying to get them into a single lowest common denominator version.
Honest question: What is your problem with traditional cookbooks like "Le guide culinaire"[0]? They are a curated source of recipes which stood the test of time.
Honestly this is what I use most of the time because it's hit the mark nearly 99% of the time. Quite a variety of recipies, and actually the comment section is genuinely full of useful information!
I just started moving my recipes all to ... github.
I find it easier to manage a bunch of markdown files than anything else.
Also rewriting them lets me list ingredients as groups as far as what goes together in a bowl or whatever ...the laundry list of ingredients so many sites list drives me crazy.
Outside of America's Test Kitchen... I've never found a blog's exposition on why they did what they did helpful. More often than not their description actually makes me question if they actually cooked the recipe often enough (or at all).
I had so much fun making <food>! I love to recreate recipes for <food>. I’ve been so pleased with the end result! It is the best dish ever! My <relatives> really enjoy it. You will enjoy it too. If you're planning to have just one half, you may want to reconsider, because once you start, you won't be able to stop. This is really the best one I've found! Please see my other recipes and visit the links below. I really like making this with my <equipment>. Read on to find out the secret to making totally awesome <food>. There are so many different side dishes to pair with <food>. Here are a few of my favorites: <side 1>, <side 2>.
What is <food>?
(1 paragraph explanation)
What is the best way to make <food>?
(1 paragraph, mentioning <food> by name at least 8 times)
What are benefits of <food>?
The aggressive SEO tactics, more than anything, are what drives me crazy.
I blame google more than anything. Unfortunately, stuffing the content to hit minimum word counts is what ranks in google, and google obviously has a monopoly on search. Without this annoying blah blah, these websites would never rank and it wouldn’t be worth the authors time to make a recipe website. Maybe google should make a blog post on a “recipes” algo update that punishes filler content (of course they will never do that, they have all the arrogance befitting a monopoly provider). Readers, SEOs, cooks and even google themselves would benefit /rant over
I mainly use BBC Good Food. Being taxpayer funded and having unlimited google juice means they don’t need to play this game.
I have a system based on Markdown-formatted (along with some custom markup for metadata) recipes on Dropbox, and some Python code that generates a formatted (as in, nice looking, like a proper cookbook) PDF cookbook. I then print the cookbook, make my notes in it, and once it gets too greasy/scribbled on, I consolidate the notes into the Markdown files and re-print. Every time I add a new recipe to my regular 'rotation', I add it to this cookbook (along with some tweaks for my ingredient availability and equipment), to not let it become just a random stack of disjoint recipes. This way I grow a proper 'family cookbook' that I hope I can pass on to my kids when they move out. It's also somewhat integrated with a broader meal-planning system, think GTD for keeping yourself fed.
I think the main problem with 'recipe websites' is that people don't want 'recipe websites'. They want 'cookbook websites', i.e. some editorial oversight over recipe quality, some standardization in units, style of directions, have a picture with each recipe, etc. What am I going to do with 100k crappy half-asses notes on everything someone somewhere ever threw together in a kitchen somewhere? I'd much rather have 2000 quality recipes that I know I can rely on.
I think crowd sourced recipes never work. Apart from obvious mistakes, a recipe is a very personal thing: how you describe steps, what ingredients, your cooking setup/hardware, what instruction you need, what ingredients are available etc. I recently did a Show HN[0] for a different approach: a private kitchen notebook to accommodate exactly this, your recipes.
I cook constantly 2-3 meals/day for my partner and myself these days, and it's not just COVID. We live in a US smallish high mountain west city and frankly, with notably rare exceptions, the eating out or takeaway experience is just abysmal. But it has been on this trajectory from when we moved here a quarter century ago. All my fault. However, now I know a trifle about cooking. The following is a biased view of a very many country traveler who loves many cuisines, not necessarily expensive.
So I cook. I have good equipment. I'm pretty darn good. I don't do "modern techniques" such as sous vide, tho David Chang might convince me yet. The partner manages the kitchen garden (tonight was the final batch of 2020 eggplants). But the real intellectual property for the various cuisines is to buy the good cookbooks, and READ them. I'm not kidding. Read through entire sections over time. The really good ones have a theme, often not explicit. And cook out of them! Make mistakes. Make glorious successes.
I will not elaborate here, but I find these these English Language authors essential:
"Chinese": Fuchsia Dunlop, for Hunan and Sichuan. I have 6 more for mostly other regional cuisines but none so uniformly excellent.
"Mexican": Diana Kennedy, Rick Bayless, and some Sante Fe, NM, US authors whose books are annoying because errors, though pretty awesome overall.
"Indian": Maya Kaimal, utterly essential. But I dip into Neelam Batra slightly less often. I have to because she is encyclopediac.
"Southern/Eastern Mediterranean": Claudia Roden (Oh you really should try out her felafel recipe, but be sure to dry out the surface of the beans after soaking. And um I made absolutely killer moussaka tonight mostly based on her recipe)
"Italian": Marcella Hazan. There are many others. Keep it simple and honest.
"French": Well I am sorry, I am going to go with the classics by Richard Olney and Julia, but I note that I only usually use "Mastering... V1" and "Simple French Cooking".
"American/Anglo": Oh this is too annoying for too many. I use the "The Joy of Cooking" as a starter. My version is copyright 1980, given to me as a going away to college gift that same year. In there is wisdom, that I have only appreciated as I have grown older and more experienced. "The Meat Book". You wonder how an Englishman could have cross cultural accuracy on Anglo sourced materials... and he does! Uhh, sure, Fuschia. Anyway, I love Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall. For vegetarian dishes, my goto author is Deborah Madison. She is perfect. Right in the tradition that is implicit in the authors I reference above, but for vegetarians. And now, I want to emphasize two authors: Michael Rhulman & Brian Polcyn, who changed the way I think about food by introducing me to real charcuterie. But I had to read it through and make a bunch of things to understand it, and then, I began to understand how a lot of other cuisines work.
Do I have my own recipe book? I do! But it is not so essential to me as the above authors.
Yeah, I'm not sure why people are so averse to just buying one or two cookbooks.
You can buy The Essential New York Times Cookbook for $2.99 right now which has 1,000+ recipes from decades of The New York Times.
And even without special pricing you can get something like The Joy of Cooking or How to Cook Everything for $20. Just one of those books is, realistically, all you need for a lifetime of cooking and will give you far more recipes and far better instruction than the website in the OP.
Also looking at step-by-step instructions allows me to quickly understand the recipe if i know most techniques involved. This way i sometimes just need a few seconds to absorb a new recipe or put it into mental cache while constructing my own based of multiple ones from the internet.
Tangentially related, but if I were to run for president I'd run on a single issue platform: Imprison anyone involved with the current state of online recipes. Want to write your 10 page life story for baked mac & cheese? Boom, 5 years in the slammer. Want to put 12 different ads on your recipe for baked Alaska Char? 10 year minimum sentence.
Involved in encouraging this behavior from the inside of Google? Sorry bub, that's gonna be three consecutive life sentences.
The price isn't even that bad, but it produces so much more packaging waste than cooking from scratch. We enjoyed the recipes, the price was good enough, but our recycling load doubled or more.
Please, Mr. President, carve out an exception for folks like the serious eats crew, who write genuinely useful culinary info in the introduction of their recipes.
E.g.: This classic béchamel-based mac and cheese is loaded to the hilt with cheese. Not only do we pack as much cheese as we can into the sauce itself, but we then mix the cooked pasta and cheese sauce with additional grated cheese, for tiny pockets of stretchy, melty bits throughout. One of the benefits of this method is that you can get enhanced browning in the oven, especially on the bottom and sides of the baking dish, thanks to the flour and butter in the sauce. (it goes on)
I made https://thisfoodblogdoesnotexist.com because I think the life stories on those recipe sites are hilarious. My site uses GPT2 to generate blog content. I could pepper it with obnoxious fake ads...
> Hi everyone! Today I am going to show you my recipe for 1-Dish Taco Bake. The recipe you see here is actually the recipe from my 4-week-old daughter, and it is a pretty simple one. When you get to the part where you have your dish in the oven, make sure it is not too hot. That's because the most important thing is to bake the dish as light as possible.
Now you just need to make the stories 25x as long and pepper it with ads!
I’ve always wanted to make a GitHub for recipes. You can fork recipes. Submit pull requests. Public and private repositories. Versioning and commit history. Share with friends, Etc.
That looks like a recipe site inside GitHub. What I wanted to make is a standalone website with git like branching and such. Everyone has their own little twist on recipes. I think it would be fun! I just need the time!
I have a little pet project from a long time ago that I tried to start with this, it lets me describe recipes like this:
Recipe|Turkey Stuffing
I|4 C==French bread hand torn into small pieces (about 1/4 inch pieces)
I|3/4 C==Butter
I|3/4 C==Onion (minced)
I|1 C==Celery
I|1 Tbsp==Salt (less if bird is butterball or self basting)
I|pinch==Pepper
I|2 Tbsp==Sage, thyme, and marjoram mixture
D|Melt butter in large skillet over low heat
D|Add onion and celery & spices, stirring often until it all smells great.
D|Pour 1/3 of the hot mixture over all the bread, then toss, then 1/3 more, toss, then last 1/3 and toss.
From there it can produce a pretty webpage to view the recipe, or produce an ingredient list for shopping (and it has some basic concept of combining shopping lists sanely), and lets me search by ingredient.
I always debate fleshing it out. 99% of the time spent with something like this is curating the recipes themselves, which I'm far from an expert in, and I don't want it to become a big time waster.
I used Markdown for recipes for more than a decade, where UL were ingredients, OL were steps, and you could use as many sets of both as needed. With some CSS and JS it worked pretty well, but wasn't super accessible for family members to add recipes to (but was great for me).
Yes inspired by based.cooking, but wanted a simpler interface than git, so anyone could submit, will add users, editing and comments when i have a mo...
I'm pretty good at telling the future. I'm going to say that ... you will have to pay.
People go to recipe sites for the content, they read it, and then they leave. They don't click on adverts or engage in any monetizable way. People build recipe sites because getting a database of recipes is easy and they're trivial to build so you can throw a site with lots of pages (and lots of ads) up on the web fast. That doesn't mean they generate any revenue.
Is is the code, formatting, etc, that we're supposed to be looking at? Or the data itself?
The data catches my eye because there seems to be quite a lot of bad data. Recipes with cooking time of 0, when it's clear that's not true. Typos like "Spahetti Carbonara". "Ham Sandwich" tagged as "Fruit".
If we're supposed to ignore all that and just evaluate the CMS bit, it looks fine. But it doesn't seem very specific to cooking. Just tag organized text.
I've recently taken a stab at something like this, too – the result is a Pandoc-and-Bash-script-based static site generator for my personal recipe collection. Recipes are written in a format based on Markdown (with ingredients listed separately for each step, which comes in real handy while cooking), and the end result is a lightweight, responsive, searchable website. I've received very positive feedback when I shared it as a "Show HN" a week and a half ago.
There's a recipe on your site called Refried Beans. I've never heard of that dish, but in any case, either the recipe is wrong, or the name is. The recipe only calls for frying the beans once.
> As described by Rick Bayless, "they're refritos—not fried again, as you might assume, but "well fried" or "intensely fried," as that re translates from Spanish.
It's a false cognate for the Spanish 'frijoles refritos'.
Frito = fried, but re is an "intensifier" that can mean "done again" but may also mean "done thoroughly" or even "in excess". Thus, they are beans that have been fried thoroughly.
In most other dialects it just means "to do again", same as English. Your confusion is understandable, because even for me as a native Spanish speaker, using it as an intensifier sounds funny.
No fucking stories about how grandma used to make this dish before Poland was invaded and the entire history thereafter before we even get to the ingredients!
If you're talking about the recipes, it's open source in that it's public domain. Or it's not open source, because it can't be copyrighted and therefore all the frameworks that allow for open source don't apply. [1]
This is actually _really, really interesting_ and could spur some really great discussion, so I was ready to check out the HN comments only to find... griping about recipe sites. Ctrl+F 'Open Source' to find this comment. Man, HN sucks.
Haha adding garlic to carbonara. That'll get you some angry Italian comments.
As I mentioned before[1], I'm skeptical of this premise. Recipes are hard to get right, hence the use of cross testers and standardized language in professional test kitchens.
I'd like a recipe site that included techniques at the same level as ingredients, and steps of preparation expressed as functions of techniques, utensils, and ingredients. Functional cooking.
If I don't have the technique or the pans, I don't need the recipe to come up in a search.
I really wish a curated site existed with the intent of the author, but there is more to this than just putting up a database and letting everyone pile on.
169 comments
[ 2.1 ms ] story [ 406 ms ] threadMost recipe websites these days are horrible (poor layout, annoying popups/popovers, crazy amounts of content that have little or nothing to do with the recipe....). The minimalism of this website is refreshing. I only wish the website itself was also open source. It would be pretty cool to be able to collaborate on and enhance the site (and a SCM hosting platform like GitHub or GitLab would provide a built-in way for maintainers to evaluate new recipe submissions, etc.)
started uploading some personal recipes to https://benjaminclauss.github.io/minimalchef/ with Hugo (PR's welcome) but this definitely will not scale
I would definitely use a Strava for Cooking.
I'm not dissing, just making sure your ducks are in a row. It's a fun idea!
https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html
Beyond the recipes themselves, the collection may be copyrighted.
The photos accompanying the recipes are also copyrighted.
"A recipe is a statement of the ingredients and procedure required for making a dish of food. A mere listing of ingredients or contents, or a simple set of directions, is uncopyrightable. As a result, the Office cannot register recipes consisting of a set of ingredients and a process for preparing a dish." https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf
Edit: The Spaghetti Carbonara recipe actually has multiple mistakes. it says the cook time is 0 minutes, it tells you to add the beaten eggs but never tells you to beat them, the recipe includes butter as an ingredient but the recipe tells you to heat the oil, and never says to grate the cheese. If this was a wiki or something I could try to fix those issues, but as it currently is I don't see any way to even flag it. It's also tagged as Banana and Greasy.
Even the base issue of at least ranking recipe blogs by quality isn't solved by other aggregators such as Google / Yummly which are more of a recipe dump.
If you or anyone else is interested I'm planning to release a version in the coming weeks - email is in profile.
Basics are "how to bind soup", "choosing and cooking pasta", or "frying onions". Common recipes are then "bound vegetable soup" or "maccharoni with tomatosause (and fried onions)". Specialities would be those recipes you try for christmas, or when the in-laws come over next month.
It's highly frustrating to find a recipe that says "bind the soup with starch" without going into how to do this (or even worse: what ingredients this needs!). But for someone more experienced, it is highly frustrating to have to read through five lines explaining how to fry the onions.
As with most education, cooking is layered: you build on top of existing knowledge, without repeating it each and every time. I presume this is partly a classification issue and organisation challenge. You don't want "how to bind soup without milk or eggs" to turn up when someone is searching "vegan tomato-soup". The web has hyperlinks, which would probably be a very good way to organize recipes.
One of them being that it's called "Spahetti Carbonara".
Separately, the recipe calls for whole eggs rather than egg yolks. This is a somewhat contentious issue, and many chefs have opinions one way or another. This recipe appears like it's The Definitive Spa(g)hetti Carbonara, but doesn't acknowledge that many consider it to be incorrect.
For me this is an issue with all recipe sites – my level of cooking ability, my ingredient preferences, how "authentic" I want to be, opinions I've formed on particular dishes – these are all very personal to me and unlikely to be fully represented in recipe sites.
I've started keeping my own recipe collection comprised of recipes I've made and enjoyed, I make no attempt to make them publishable, and I edit them as much as I feel necessary.
Whereas a site like this I reckon would aim for having definite versions of recipes, which is a) I think impossible for any dish and b) pretty much useless if you don’t happen to live in the exact region where it is from.
E.g. I have 3 different versions of the recipe for a Finnish blueberry pie. The original (well nothing original about it, just how my mother learned to make it), a Swiss version and a Colombian one. Because for the latter two I need different substitutes for the filling and slightly different measurements and baking time over all.
For me, recipe sites are just a starting point and inspiration for the personal collection. And I prefer having many different versions, some traditional, some sacrilegious available to compare and try rather than trying to get them into a single lowest common denominator version.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_guide_culinaire
Does BBC Food count? It's ad-free if you are in the UK (possibly not if you're outside the UK). It has a wealth of recipes and food-related content:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/food
Alas, not free -- but for my money, well worth it.
I find it easier to manage a bunch of markdown files than anything else.
Also rewriting them lets me list ingredients as groups as far as what goes together in a bowl or whatever ...the laundry list of ingredients so many sites list drives me crazy.
Outside of America's Test Kitchen... I've never found a blog's exposition on why they did what they did helpful. More often than not their description actually makes me question if they actually cooked the recipe often enough (or at all).
The aggressive SEO tactics, more than anything, are what drives me crazy.
I mainly use BBC Good Food. Being taxpayer funded and having unlimited google juice means they don’t need to play this game.
BBC Food was the publicly funded website, but I think that was shut down a few years ago.
Org counterpart (single file), but similar story. Static html export is handy also.
> Also rewriting them lets me list ingredients as groups as far as what goes together in a bowl or whatever
Lol. Ingredient grouping. Nice to hear it’s not just me.
https://xenodium.com/cheese-cake-recipe-no-crust https://xenodium.com/oatmeal-cookie-recipe https://xenodium.com/dal-makhani-black-lentils-recipe
I think the main problem with 'recipe websites' is that people don't want 'recipe websites'. They want 'cookbook websites', i.e. some editorial oversight over recipe quality, some standardization in units, style of directions, have a picture with each recipe, etc. What am I going to do with 100k crappy half-asses notes on everything someone somewhere ever threw together in a kitchen somewhere? I'd much rather have 2000 quality recipes that I know I can rely on.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26609394
And most importantly start your own recipe book.
So I cook. I have good equipment. I'm pretty darn good. I don't do "modern techniques" such as sous vide, tho David Chang might convince me yet. The partner manages the kitchen garden (tonight was the final batch of 2020 eggplants). But the real intellectual property for the various cuisines is to buy the good cookbooks, and READ them. I'm not kidding. Read through entire sections over time. The really good ones have a theme, often not explicit. And cook out of them! Make mistakes. Make glorious successes.
I will not elaborate here, but I find these these English Language authors essential:
"Chinese": Fuchsia Dunlop, for Hunan and Sichuan. I have 6 more for mostly other regional cuisines but none so uniformly excellent.
"Mexican": Diana Kennedy, Rick Bayless, and some Sante Fe, NM, US authors whose books are annoying because errors, though pretty awesome overall.
"Indian": Maya Kaimal, utterly essential. But I dip into Neelam Batra slightly less often. I have to because she is encyclopediac.
"Southern/Eastern Mediterranean": Claudia Roden (Oh you really should try out her felafel recipe, but be sure to dry out the surface of the beans after soaking. And um I made absolutely killer moussaka tonight mostly based on her recipe)
"Italian": Marcella Hazan. There are many others. Keep it simple and honest.
"French": Well I am sorry, I am going to go with the classics by Richard Olney and Julia, but I note that I only usually use "Mastering... V1" and "Simple French Cooking".
"American/Anglo": Oh this is too annoying for too many. I use the "The Joy of Cooking" as a starter. My version is copyright 1980, given to me as a going away to college gift that same year. In there is wisdom, that I have only appreciated as I have grown older and more experienced. "The Meat Book". You wonder how an Englishman could have cross cultural accuracy on Anglo sourced materials... and he does! Uhh, sure, Fuschia. Anyway, I love Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall. For vegetarian dishes, my goto author is Deborah Madison. She is perfect. Right in the tradition that is implicit in the authors I reference above, but for vegetarians. And now, I want to emphasize two authors: Michael Rhulman & Brian Polcyn, who changed the way I think about food by introducing me to real charcuterie. But I had to read it through and make a bunch of things to understand it, and then, I began to understand how a lot of other cuisines work.
Do I have my own recipe book? I do! But it is not so essential to me as the above authors.
You can buy The Essential New York Times Cookbook for $2.99 right now which has 1,000+ recipes from decades of The New York Times.
And even without special pricing you can get something like The Joy of Cooking or How to Cook Everything for $20. Just one of those books is, realistically, all you need for a lifetime of cooking and will give you far more recipes and far better instruction than the website in the OP.
Also looking at step-by-step instructions allows me to quickly understand the recipe if i know most techniques involved. This way i sometimes just need a few seconds to absorb a new recipe or put it into mental cache while constructing my own based of multiple ones from the internet.
Involved in encouraging this behavior from the inside of Google? Sorry bub, that's gonna be three consecutive life sentences.
But personal stories are, And descriptive text is too. Probably why they’re added.
I’ll agree about the ads. Thus we signed up for platejoy (YC 2017?)
Platejoy just gives recipes. You buy your own groceries(or at least that’s how we use it)
It’s mainly about meal planning.
E.g.: This classic béchamel-based mac and cheese is loaded to the hilt with cheese. Not only do we pack as much cheese as we can into the sauce itself, but we then mix the cooked pasta and cheese sauce with additional grated cheese, for tiny pockets of stretchy, melty bits throughout. One of the benefits of this method is that you can get enhanced browning in the oven, especially on the bottom and sides of the baking dish, thanks to the flour and butter in the sauce. (it goes on)
https://www.seriouseats.com/recipes/2016/11/classic-bechamel...
> Hi everyone! Today I am going to show you my recipe for 1-Dish Taco Bake. The recipe you see here is actually the recipe from my 4-week-old daughter, and it is a pretty simple one. When you get to the part where you have your dish in the oven, make sure it is not too hot. That's because the most important thing is to bake the dish as light as possible.
Now you just need to make the stories 25x as long and pepper it with ads!
- https://www.cinc.kitchen/
- https://github.com/lukesmithxyz/based.cooking/ (which the submitted site may be derived from?)
I always debate fleshing it out. 99% of the time spent with something like this is curating the recipes themselves, which I'm far from an expert in, and I don't want it to become a big time waster.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=opensource.cooking
https://github.com/locua/oscooking
OP - if you have a JSON export of the data, I’d love to include it in the index.
https://github.com/lukesmithxyz/based.cooking
Their github with their fork of that repo.
Yes inspired by based.cooking, but wanted a simpler interface than git, so anyone could submit, will add users, editing and comments when i have a mo...
Sounds like a great guy to have a conversation with
People go to recipe sites for the content, they read it, and then they leave. They don't click on adverts or engage in any monetizable way. People build recipe sites because getting a database of recipes is easy and they're trivial to build so you can throw a site with lots of pages (and lots of ads) up on the web fast. That doesn't mean they generate any revenue.
The data catches my eye because there seems to be quite a lot of bad data. Recipes with cooking time of 0, when it's clear that's not true. Typos like "Spahetti Carbonara". "Ham Sandwich" tagged as "Fruit".
If we're supposed to ignore all that and just evaluate the CMS bit, it looks fine. But it doesn't seem very specific to cooking. Just tag organized text.
I've recently taken a stab at something like this, too – the result is a Pandoc-and-Bash-script-based static site generator for my personal recipe collection. Recipes are written in a format based on Markdown (with ingredients listed separately for each step, which comes in real handy while cooking), and the end result is a lightweight, responsive, searchable website. I've received very positive feedback when I shared it as a "Show HN" a week and a half ago.
It's available as open source here: https://github.com/doersino/nyum
There's also a demo: https://doersino.github.io/nyum/_site/index.html
Finally, here's what the Markdown source for an example recipe looks like: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/doersino/nyum/main/_recipe...
While I applaud the efforts (truly!), I hope the community can get behind one.
Where I sit, I don't want to sit and type out my wife's recipes on a site that'll be gone in a year. So I'll wait.
> As described by Rick Bayless, "they're refritos—not fried again, as you might assume, but "well fried" or "intensely fried," as that re translates from Spanish.
Frito = fried, but re is an "intensifier" that can mean "done again" but may also mean "done thoroughly" or even "in excess". Thus, they are beans that have been fried thoroughly.
In most other dialects it just means "to do again", same as English. Your confusion is understandable, because even for me as a native Spanish speaker, using it as an intensifier sounds funny.
Comida recalentada is probably microwaved left-overs, not burnt scraps.
I'm am down!
This is actually _really, really interesting_ and could spur some really great discussion, so I was ready to check out the HN comments only to find... griping about recipe sites. Ctrl+F 'Open Source' to find this comment. Man, HN sucks.
[1] https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html#:~:text=...
As I mentioned before[1], I'm skeptical of this premise. Recipes are hard to get right, hence the use of cross testers and standardized language in professional test kitchens.
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26420783
If I don't have the technique or the pans, I don't need the recipe to come up in a search.
This site, started in 1999, attempted OP's goals:
https://foodgeeks.com/
... it was probably one of my fave sites for years that was actively curated, but it took a LOT of time to keep healthy.
I appreciate the effort, but this isn't as easy as it looks.