Food blogging is the same as anything else. It's opinion. You're free to agree or disagree.

However, lots of good food bloggers give lots of information that isn't subjective. Is a medium rare steak medium rare? How long does it take to get service? Do they take reservations? Plus you usually get pictures/video from real life people rather than the restaurant's website...and if you're like me, you absolutely HATE how most restaurants do websites with stupid flash movies, loud lounge music and you have to dig through mountains of shit just to find their menus which don't have f'n prices on them.

And hey, if food blogging annoys you, you don't have to read. No one is pulling a Clockwork Orange on you. That just tells me you're annoying yourself on purpose, you masochist weirdo.

I find that anyone that says something like this doesn't know what good food is.

^i know tonnes of good food, but i'm not a good writer nor am i creative.

my post wasnt directed at you, but in general.

Here's how you determine whether food is good or not. You remove price from the equation. Good food comes cheap, or expensive, and bad food is available in both.

Cool. But I gotta ask, do you take the same approach toward people who review cars who don't design them, or movie reviewers who can't direct films?

^ I agree with you, but most good food (michelin star(s)) are expensive.

How do you define 'good' food? I know a TON of good food that isn't 'Michelin Star' rated. Heck, there aren't even any Michelin Star restaurants in Canada. Does that mean there isn't good food in vancouver? :concentrate:

Everyone has different tastes. Curry can taste like shit to someone and amazing to others.

"Good food", to me, is food that stands out from the rest of its kind. Be it pho, dim sums, steak houses, if its better than the rest I've eaten, it's good food to me. Sure all the rest tastes good, just not AS good. And if a group of people agree, then it just means you're not alone when you say its good.

I'm not saying all good food must be Michelin star, I'm just using it as an example.

Quality food will always be expensive.

http://camerasandcuisines.com/wp-con...9e-950x629.jpg

Chicago Hot Dog, $2.50. Many agree one of the best hot dogs in Chicago.

Quality food doesn't mean fine dining. A lot of home cooked food is pretty quality, ie. mom's cooking. Food made with love usually is good quality also.

Just my two cents.

I think the best thing to eat in vancouver is the nammer subs from hung ting. Seriously.

^ Do you mean Tung Hing?

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Price has no bearing on whether food is good or not. None. One of the best steaks I've ever had in my life was $5, bought on the streets of Frankfurt from a non-descript tent during the 2006 World Cup. Not near the stadium...in the business district. Seriously. Amazing fries as well. My friends and I regard that as one of the highlights of our backpacking trip.

On the flip side, I've had steaks that claim to be raised on grass that only grows on the moon, dry aged for an eternity and cost a fortune that...well, just weren't that good.

It doesn't matter what food costs. It just matters how it tastes.

I like o-toro and I can't find a place that serves it cheap. I like steaks aged 90-120 days and those come at a premium. I like wagyu and it's not cheap.

I love ikura, uni, geoduck, hamachi, Madai sushi but can't find any place that serves it cheap and good at the same time. Steamed rock cod is one of my favorite cooked fish dishes, and most restaurants serve it at $25 a pound.

Of course I also love cheap food like poutine, fried chicken , pho and what not. The last time I read a blogger talk about red wagon, I went there to try it and was hugely disappointed. I find the "hole in the wall" places are really subjective. I don't like phom penh and ppl praise it like no tomorrow. For me personally, I like to read about fancy specialty restaurants and go try them if they are good.
Are there any bloggers in Vancouver that focus mostly on fine dining?

Strong user status

I remember I gave him that awhile back but I don't remember what for.

But I guess this is a pretty good example.

In other words, the cost of the ingredients used to prepare a dish is of greater importance than the preparation in your assessment of it.

http://winnipegpublibrary.files.word.../05/snob11.gif

Ah, yes, quite.

Hmm, rather.

For me it's a balance between food being filling and overall cost. I can't justify paying $100 for a 2-inch by 2-inch piece of space grass-fed steak, and three small pieces of vegetables grown in the Himalayas and have to go to McDonalds after the meal because I was still hungry (This is why I hate shows like Top Chef, where they consider a tiny-ass plate of food a "complete dish"). On the other hand, I'd pay $20 for a decent steak, with a sizable portion of greens on the side, and leave satisfied.

It's not the cost of the ingredients that makes the dish good, but the quality of the ingredient does play a huge part in it.

I've steamed fresh rock cod and pan fried Australian wagyu at home. Both were easy to make but it was so damn good. Better than steak I've had at Hy's.

Do you use $100 bills to wipe your ass and your face too? This thread isn't about you. Nobody cares

i suggest you watch a few episodes of anthony bourdaine's no reservations. it will prove that quality food can be dirt cheap or incredibly expensive. like many products, food pricing is determine by cost of goods and moreso, marketing. Jordan sneakers are made in a chinese factory for cheap, but cost $250+ and regarded by many sneaker freaks as the only shoes to collect.

Still hurt over something?

Yeah, that you have to resort to scamming people to pay for your leased toys.
Stay classy, Philip.

(too bad that thread got black-holed in the FC..)

Congratulations, BlackZRoadster. You've successfully found the one and only wrong answer for "What makes food good?"