Food writer Bee Wilson recently posed a question to readers on her blog, asking if they were more or less likely to make a recipe in a cookbook where some recipes have photos and others do not. She called these 'orphan recipes' and feels that they are overlooked by most people because they lack an accompanying image. Wilson thinks she might belong in that category because after a friend recommended a Meera Sodha recipe for Chicken in Pickling Spices, she realized that although she had made many recipes from that book, this was one that she had not yet tried - and it did not have a photograph.
© virtosmedia, 123RF Free ImagesComments to Wilson's tweet (I will never, ever, call it an X post) on the subject featured a variety of perspectives. While some people agreed that it would be easy to overlook a recipe without photos, others were more likely to make such a recipe because there wouldn't be any pressure to make the finished product look exactly the same as the photograph accompanying the recipe. Another subset preferred cookbooks that contain no photographs at all, noting wonderful books from authors including Julia Child, Nigel Slater, and Elizabeth David.
I have probably overlooked a cookbook recipe because there was no image accompanying it, but I suspect that is just because of the way I leaf through books searching for inspiration. Undoubtedly a gorgeous photo will stimulate my senses if I'm just flipping through the book and not closely reading it. That said, some of my all-time favorite recipes come from books with no or few images: The Cake Bible, Rick Bayless's Mexican Kitchen, and Cook's Illustrated's bound annuals all come to mind. I do appreciate a good illustrative photo or sketch, especially when it comes to shaping or assembling something, and I enjoy looking at stunning photos. But in the end, a beautiful picture will not make up for a recipe with unclear instructions or unbalanced flavors. After reading this article, I am going to pay more attention to 'orphan' recipes in search of gems I may have overlooked.
CookShelf
21 comments
Mayandbill
pitterpat4
sanfrannative
anya_sf
lkgrover
When I review books on Amazon (or star books on EYB), I try to respect the author's intent. I might note the lack of photos but it does not affect my rating. Photography greatly increases the book's production costs, and I often think it is unnecessary to have everything illustrated.
EmilyR
love2laf
breakthroughc
Fyretigger
But from a strong source like New York Times or America's Test Kitchen or a chef I trust, I'm not daunted by a lack of photos.
Ganga108
Pics assist when the recipe isn't written well. How thin you slice the paneer, for example, a real life example from making Chilli Paneer the other day. Mind you, I have bought cookbooks purely because of the pics. The Art of Pasta and Tiffin spring to mind.
GenieB
I have noticed that the photos in some cookbooks don’t have the same ingredients as the recipes!
FuzzyChef
jaxcap
Indio32
*Who cooks a stew then decants it into a new Le Creuset casserole to take the recipe photo or how many recipes seem to have chopped parsley placed with tweezers? All very instagram!
Foodycat
bhasenstab
ellabee
CutCookEat
AnneOther
valente347
My EYB membership has really helped me focus on recipes and not the photos. I'm fine cooking without them because I grew up that way, but I'm happy I have a resource that can pull me to recipes I may have overlooked because it didn't have a photo.
bittrette
I am of the unromantic opinion that a cookbook is an instruction manual.
IMO the most helpful pictures are the ones that illustrate techniques or show varieties of produce.
The worst offenders are those cookbooks that contain pictures of the author doing nothing helpful, often just mugging for the camera. (Those, and the one with a picture of the author on the spine.) Honestly, will such pictures make me a better cook?
When my sister gave me a cookbook that seemed more of a picture book than a cookbook, I exchanged it for a photoless cookbook.