Good Evening,
We (and every other forum) have beat to death the details of appearance or presentation scores.
This is not an attempt to revisit that discussion.
To point out how appearance or presentation are important, take a look at a currently running "Food Detectives" episode on Food TV.
Next showing--
Mar 29, 2009
4:00 PM ET/PT
To make a long story short--they presented identical meals presented with "plastic silverware" and a cheap environment and then in a "high end" environment with real silverware and fancy names on the menu.
On a scale of 1-10, the low end scored 3.4 and the high end 8.0 averages.
"Price" estimated for the low end was about $10 while the high end was worth $34.
I hope I got the numbers right
Anywho, the results were dramatically different based on the diners "expectation" of quality.
There is real motivation there to make every entry as "enticing" as possible.
However you do that.
As they say, you eat with your eyes first.
Just a thought.
TIM
We (and every other forum) have beat to death the details of appearance or presentation scores.
This is not an attempt to revisit that discussion.
To point out how appearance or presentation are important, take a look at a currently running "Food Detectives" episode on Food TV.
Next showing--
Mar 29, 2009
4:00 PM ET/PT
To make a long story short--they presented identical meals presented with "plastic silverware" and a cheap environment and then in a "high end" environment with real silverware and fancy names on the menu.
On a scale of 1-10, the low end scored 3.4 and the high end 8.0 averages.
"Price" estimated for the low end was about $10 while the high end was worth $34.
I hope I got the numbers right
Anywho, the results were dramatically different based on the diners "expectation" of quality.
There is real motivation there to make every entry as "enticing" as possible.
However you do that.
As they say, you eat with your eyes first.
Just a thought.
TIM