Are they are meme? I literally can't find the point except to cook stuff directly from stove to to oven.
>>7558242
They kinda are, new cast iron pants don't have a great metal surface to "season" and make non stick like the pans made before your parents were alive.
They're not a meme if you take the time to lap the surface, properly season, and use it consistently. They can be great for pan frying and searing, and they're durable to last for decades. You cannot say that about any other pan.
>>7558242
Durable as fuck if you take care of them and season right like that guy said. The only pan for shallow frying as far as I'm concerned. So any kind of breaded cutlet or fried chicken it's awesome for. Also cornbread and things of the like. I haven't tried pizza in mine but a lot of people do that as well.
>>7558274
They're still a meme even if you season them. They are not versatile at all, the ones in my kitchen are limited to a small number of niche tasks such as searing meat and making corn bread. Invest in a solid, thick copper pan and it will last just as long, have superior thermal qualities, won't impart unwanted flavors on acidic foods, and won't rust if you look at it the wrong way.
>>7558294
Keep hearing about copper pans more and more. Any brand recommendations?
>>7558242
>are they are meme
A faggot AND a retard, I'm impressed.
>>7558294
>acidic foods in pure copper
enjoy your copper toxicity
>>7558294
also they won't rust but you do have to fucking polish them after every cleaning or they will corrode - because copper is still a reactive metal, you numbskull.
if you want to recommend something for the plebs recommend copper-LINED wear
>>7558298
The main modern manufacturers of copperware are mauviel, falk, and baumalu. I would recommend against getting copper cookware new, as they don't make them very thick anymore and new ones cost an exorbitant amount of money. If you are serious about getting a fine piece of copper cookware (at the risk of sounding like a hipster fuckboy) I would recommend you go vintage, and look for one that's at least 3 mm thick. Brand doesn't really matter, any copper pan that's sufficiently thick will give you very quick reactions to heat changes and very even heat. That being said, some of the thickest copper cookware I've seen is made by gaillard, mora, legry, and jacquotot. All of these manufacturers are now defunct but you can still find some of their wares from 50 to over 200 years ago floating around.
>>7558319
if you knew jack shit about cookware you would know that 99% of copper cookware comes lined with tin or stainless steel and that's what I was referring to
>>7558329
>fuck up
>DURR UR THE IDIOT
lel
copper poisoning must be leaching your brain already
>>7558332
>this damage control
>>7558325
Stay away from Baumalu from ebay, craigslist, and discount stores (TJmaxx, etc)
There was a bad batch that got rejected by the manufacturer in France, repurchased by some shady characters and sold on the grey market, the word is the tin has high levels of lead and you'd have to get them retinned to be usable.
Also I do believe Bourgeat is a separate manufacturer in its own right, and don't forget Soy, Ruffoni, and Amoretti for modern manufacturers. Falk is probably #1 as far as people buying it to actually use it, most of the others (except maybe Soy) is bought to hang on the wall, as demonstrated by the fact that most Mauviel sold today is the M150 line.
Also you're not going to find anything 3mm thick that's steel lined, the 2.5mm steel lined stuff is plenty good. Actually for something small like a 1.5qt sauce pan or a 10" fry pan, 2mm is sufficient. The bigger pieces (large saute pans especially) require thicker copper to perform well because most burners only go up to a certain size and you need more thickness to spread the heat around.
Nothing against tin per se but just realize you're limiting your options if you demand 3mm thickness. For most people stainless lining is more versatile, certainly more stress free if you have houseguests or family using your gear.
>>7558332
just stop, it isn't as funny as you think
>>7558242
They are fine and work well for most any type of cooking. All thats needed is the will to make it better. Im living on a 10 inch cast iron pan and a stainless steel 2 quart pot for every thing I cook, and a decent amount of my baking. I am using recent manufacture cast iron.
>the point
Youre stupid if you this is something that has a "point" or that it has to have one
>>7558294
>Superior thermal qualities
The word your looking for is different, not superior
http://foodal.com/kitchen/pots-pots-skillets-guides-reviews/copper/getting-started-copper-cookware/
since you obviously arent educated yourself.
>let me just spend $300 on one pan while a cast iron one is $30
>>7558310
> this butthurt over a type of pan
>>7558358
>Youre stupid if you this is something that has a "point" or that it has to have one
Tell me again, what's a piece of cookware that you have that doesn't have a point?
>>7558358
This article is somewhat misinformed, for example the comments about rolled edges being bad are completely wrong. It is true that most of the very cheapest copper cookware (the stuff meant for display and serving) has a rolled edge, but also some very good cookware has rolled edges - falk, bourgeat, and some contract-made mauviel pieces sold under other brand names, for instance. As far as I'm aware these are only seen with stainless lining and were fairly uncommon until the last decade or so.
Anyway try to post better stuff if you're going to be a condescending jackass. Not the guy you're replying to, btw.
>>7558370
sorry I phrased that badly
Youre stupid if you cant see the point of a very common cooking implement
>>7558379
>>7558358
This, for example, is what falk's edges look like.
>>7558379
>I'm the condesecnding jackass
Yeah cause Im the one telling people that they need to buy a 300 dollar pan.
Thanks for completely ignoring the context I posted the article in, in relation to the heat properties of copper, and going full autist on rolled edges.
>Not the guy you're replying to, btw.
uh huh, sure
Dont you have a pan to retin or something?
>>7558397
>there must only be one person on all of /ck/ who has a copper pan
This may come as a surprise to you, but there are normies with jobs on 4chan now.
And I ignored the context because the other guy is already giving you a thorough education without my help. I just wanted to point out that the first hit on google isn't necessarily the best at explaining a topic, just the best at SEO.
>>7558402
What other guy? Youre the only one who's responded to me
>and implying I dont have a job
Im not saying that copper is bad, Im just saying that all this meme-hate for cast iron is undeserved
>>7558423
My first post in this thread was this >>7558351
I can't tell which posts are yours, but if I follow the posts it definitely seems like someone else was having an argument with you about copper.
>Im not saying that copper is bad, Im just saying that all this meme-hate for cast iron is undeserved
It's all in good fun, you can keep on implying that all copper pans are tinned and cause copper toxicity, and I'll keep on implying that people who use cast iron are just cosplaying some pioneer old timey role play with their pocket knives used as chef knives and their irrational fear of having more than one piece of cooking equipment because the oxen might get tired.
>>7558429
You're not even good enough at cooking to be concerned with all this pots and pans talk
>>7558433
OOOOOOOOOO NO HE DI'INT OOOOOO SHIT DAWG YOU GONNA TAKE THAT OOOOOH SHIIIT
>>7558423
Nobody here hates cast iron, I was simply saying it's not the end all perfect tool for everything that it's touted around as around here. The reality is there are better tools for all but a few niche tasks.
>>7558429
considering that >>7558358 was my first post, you may need to realize that just like theres more than one person here willing to correct ideas about cast iron
I never said it caused copper toxicity, or that all of them were tin lined, again maybe you should check the poster counter on the right, instead of assuming that theres only 3 people in a thread. I just pointed out that re-tinning is something that copper pans have done to them sometimes
>>7558443
The reality is those better tools cost 1000% more than a 25-30 dollar cast iron pan. Not everyone has that choice my dude, and even the ones that do might be tempted by the price tag.
>>7558451
A decent suit costs about $1000, a decent shirt costs about $100, an undershirt costs about $10
You need all three, just because they are all "apparel" doesn't mean one is "better" or "worse" than the other, unless you try to substitute an undershirt for a shirt in which case, yes, you're going to experience some difficulties. Kind of like the difficulties you might experience trying to cook a delicate sauce with a 25 pound hunk of blackened iron.
>>7558449
>haha i cant cook but im a nerd who knows a lot about metals
>>7558298
Hope you got a fat bank account, they are expensive as shit but definitely the best quality
>>7558457
This isn't true though.
I have two non stick pans, one cast iron pan, and two good stainless steel pans that I saved up for. I really don't need another fucking expensive pan to make really good food. I'd love to see the inside of your favorite chefs kitchen and see if they have a million different hundred dollar pans. Even if he does, I'd like to hear him say that he can't make amazing food unless he has a nonstick, a cast iron, a stainless, a copper, and a stoneware. He would make food just as good if not better than yours with two stainless pans. Get over it dude god damn. It's fine if you have an enjoy your copper pan but not everyone needs one. That's fucking silly.
>>7558242
Pros- durable, high heat capacity and retention, oven safe
Cons- high maintenance, heavy, poor conductor of heat, needs to stay away from acids until seasoning is built up
I like my cast iron pan but copper cookware is the best (and most expensive). I also would rate 3 ply stainless steel and aluminum as a superior product
>>7558490
> see if they have a million different hundred dollar pans
Probably not a million.
And yeah, we all get it, a top tier professional can get by without nice stuff, but for the rest of us plebs, the nice stuff levels the playing field a bit.
>>7558463
>I cant cook but I can shitpost
>>7558457
>undershirt costing $10
>All that other bullshit
Great analogy, cause the thing is, heres the kicker, unless you go to social functions or work in a high enough job, you dont buy a $1000 suit or a $100 shirt.
If copper pans are a suit, cast iron pans are actual every day clothes, jeans and a decent shirt, actually useful and they work well. While the copper pan works well for some things, the thing is its more niche than cast iron because cast iron can do everything a copper pan can, excluding the delicate sauce youre talking about, and other more delicate things.
Would I try to wear normal clothes to a wedding or funeral? No of course not, but I wouldnt wear an expensive suit when Im just going for a walk outside either.
>>7558490
this Ive seen too many chef vids where they just use carbon steel, cast iron, or SS pans.
>>7558497
I wouldnt call not scrubbing them and allowing for it to season "high mantenace"
>>7558511
I pity you that you think you can buy skill
>>7558497
3 ply is a scam though, in most cases the manufacturers are using less aluminum to control costs, but selling it at a premium over solid aluminum with an inner stainless lining.
There's some small performance improvement for 3+ply if the aluminum thickness is retained, but once you get to the prices of the super thick 5 or 7 ply cookware, you're pushing into 2.5mm copper pricing, at which point you might as well just get the copper. As far as I'm aware the only manufacturer that does it right is Demeyere and it's disc bottom which is annoying as fuck to deal with when it's a small pan on a gas burner.
>>7558526
>I pity you that you think you can buy skill
But that's basically the opposite of what I said.
>>7558511
> a top tier professional can get by without nice stuff
I mean dude I spent enough on a good stainless pan and once I learned to cook with it, I'm all set. I can feasibly cook anything I want in it except like a fried egg or a pancake, in that case I'd rather use my nonstick. Sauces, searing meat, etc. Copper might be better in some ways or even all, but you're not going to convince me I need one when everything I cook in my stainless pans is exactly the way I want it. my cast iron can do the rest for 25 bucks.
>>7558526
If you fuck up your pan once you are back to square 1 and your eggs start sticking again. I drink before I cook sometimes and I have forgotten to clean and dry it immediately before, it's never a problem to clean the next day with any other pans
>>7558358
Cast iron pan 10" or 12" is more like $20, just saying, but they are about 1/10 the price.
>>7558294
Made a plain egg omlette in my cast iron this morning, nothing stuck, then I grilled some pulled pork made last night and after all that toasted some tortillas on it, all done within 5 minutes, OH AND CLEAN UP? I wiped up a paper towel with some olive oil and rubbed the inside of the pan with it while it was still warm/hot.
The inside of my pan isn't smooth, I didn't season it, I just cook in it, and clean up is stupid simple. The pan does take about 2 minutes to heat up, but that's how long I usually take to gather ingredients to cook in it.
>>7558549
Sure it can be done, but why deny yourself the advantage if you're serious about cooking?
>>7558558
Not true, there's a technique used where you heat up the pan and rub it down with olive oil while its still hot and let it cool, then the next time you cook add butter, jack shit sticks and build your seasoning like this slowly after a few times. If you get cooked on crap get a vinyl brush scrub it off, even use some soap and a sponge, you're not gonna tear the seasoning off.
>>7558564
Because paying for an advantage is cheating and we should all do everything in the most ass-backwards complicated way possible.
I use a cast iron skillet for literally everything and in my mind, this makes me Gordon Ramsay.
>>7558564
First of all because money. Second of all because like I said, everything I cook is just about perfect, and I guess I haven't tried a copper pan yet, but I can't imagine the food being noticeably better than it is in a stainless.
>>7558575
by the way when I say perfect I mean exactly the way I want it to be. not sucking my own dick.
Why is most cast iron so fucking rough, now days? My old cast iron from grandpa is smooth and lovely.
>>7558564
>advantage
dude like I said before, you cant buy skill, so having a pan that is kind of better wont suddenly bring you closer to a pro chef's skill.
>>7558558
I guess cast iron's not for you then, maybe you should think about AA meetings instead of what type of pan is better for drinking while youre cooking
>>7558560
Yeah I know, but I was just over estimating for vintage cast iron
>>7558578
They used to use a different method back in the day for the finish. They would use some kind of sanding method, but as the industries became more streamlined around the 50's and 60's, most companies stopped doing that finish.
>>7558578
Your grandpa's has been seasoned and getting for the last 4 decades, the new stuff isnt but you can do it
>>7558580
>dude like I said before, you cant buy skill, so
And like I said before, you and I are on the same page there. You can't buy skill, but you can buy a nicer pan, and since I'd rather have a nice pan than an xbox or drugs or whatever you people spend your money on, I'll take the nice pan. My cooking ends up better, and yours ends up being retroactively rationalized as "just like gordon ramsay because real chefs can make a gourmet meal with a roll of tin foil and a bic lighter"
Although if you want to get really nitpicky, you *can* buy skill, it's just that the opportunity cost of going to chef school is crazy compared to just buying a nice pan.
>>7558582
Sand casting hasn't changed bro. It still works the same way today as it did back then.
The difference is that old skillets have been used a lot; the smoothness is due to wear, not due to a different process.
>>7558592
well Lodge doesn't, and they are a pretty popular brand. its the one I have.
>>7558592
he's clearly referring to some secondary machining process to produce a smooth finish.
i don't think any amount of cooking can give a piece of cast iron that finish.
>>7558592
Is there a way to quicken the process? I got a 10 inch because grandpa's pan is a bit large for some situations, but it's so rough and porous it's almost unusable for anything but baking with copious grease. It will begrudgingly relinquish a frittata.
>>7558590
I dont why youre assuming that your cooking would turn out better, simply it seems, from the fact that you used a different pan
>>7558619
I'm not assuming, I know it does turn out better, because I have different kinds of pans.
I can't prove to you that an airplane gets me to Chicago faster than a bus either, and yet, I'm satisfied that it does. You can believe whatever you need to tell yourself to justify your own choices that affect you.
>>7558617
first off I read something from americas test kitchen about seasoning and they found that flaxseed oil is superior to canola or anything else for seasoning cast iron. they said to strip your current seasoning by running the self clean on your oven with the pan inside, then rub with flaxseed oil for about an hour at...I want to say 350 but maybe more, and repeat that about 5 times.
secondly google stuff about sanding your pans. I know some people have done it but I don't know specifics. obviously sand paper but I don't know what grit/for how long, etc.
>>7558629
>the difference between a copper and cast iron pan is like an airplane and bus
lol ok
You can buy a plane because its faster than a bus sure, but if you dont have the skill either way youre not getting to chicago
>>7558618
no, sand blasting is nothing to do with sand casting.
they could cast these pans smooth but don't as it is part of factory preseasoning.
i suppose sand blasting could be used to create a slightly keyed surface finish but most people want a pre seasoned pan that stays seasoned and doesn't require too much maintenance
>>7558631
Ok, I could try that. I've always seasoned with animal fat.
>>7558640
>the difference between a copper and cast iron pan is like an airplane and bus
That's the analogy, anyway. A 737 can't drop you into the middle of a crowded city, but a bus can't cover thousands of miles in a matter of hours.
Likewise, cast iron is really great for steaks, oven roasted potatoes, and stuff like that, and terrible for cooking a delicate butter-based sauce that requires maintaining a temperature just short of burning. A copper pan doesn't do as well on steak, although it's no slouch either as long as it's steel lined and not tin lined.
>>7558641
yeah I would definitely prefer a smooth finish and I would think everyone else would too since the factory 'preseason' is just ridiculous and it tells you to do it yourself anyway.
>>7558661
I love copper. Copper bottom steel is where it's at.
>>7558661
I like how you all act like making a butter sauce in cast iron is simply impossible. If you want to give hundreds of dollars to someone for a pan be my guest, but you don't need it. I guess that's what capitalism does, makes you think you need shit you don't need. Obviously its better for making a sauce like that, but you don't fucking NEED it you numbskull.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypYRfbMSyRo
>>7558242
Takeaway from this thread: Yes.
>>7558712
Of course if you have a layer of fucking juice under the butter it's not going to burn.
That's not delicate at all, it's like using a cast iron as a double boiler and then saying the cast iron is what controlled the temperature.
>>7558712
He didn't say impossible. I like how you seem to think having the best tools for the job is some kind of woeful extravagance.
>>7558783
>extravagance
that's exactly what a hugely expensive pan is. extravagant. thank you for simplifying it.
>>7558784
You're a fucking idiot. Go make a hollandaise sauce in your cast iron skillet right now and show us how it turns out.
>>7558795
I wouldn't do that, although it's possible. I would do it in my stainless. Not a 300 dollar super special copper pan.
>>7558795
>Go make something in a pan that you shouldnt really make in a pan anyway!
>>7558806
But that is "lodge logic" in a nutshell
>>7558784
>this much mental gymnastics to justify your pitiful poverty
your efforts would be much better used getting a better job m8
>>7558813
>this much mental gymnastics to convince yourself you need a 300 dollar pan to cook something well
man. capitalism really has poisoned our population. kek. pathetic.
Yes, it is a meme, as evidenced by its mindless cult following here who will defend it despite its several objective shortcomings.
>>7558840
There are no shortcomings except in the minds of capitalism keks
>>7558292
Do it bro, it is god tier. I made it in mine and it came out amazing
I have and used cast iron, they have their place
restaurants don't use them because they take too long to heat up and to cool down, are too heavy to handle and rely on temping (most restaurants will heat a pan and them drench it in water afterwards)
the advantages of them:
A. lifespan, they outlive other kinds of pan a hundredfold, they don't have a special surface, the surface develops as you use them; so they don't abbraid down
you can chip them, but honestly what chips cast iron? unless you use a steel pickaxe as a spatula it will never happen
B. heat retention
sure they take a while to heat, but they stay hot
you can take them off the stove with food in them, and that food will stay hot/continue cooking slowly
it also lets you raise the temperature of a larger volume of food quickly because the heat transfers from the pan to the food
so for cooking something that you don't want to cook for long; but can't cook in batches it's ideal
C. thermal stability
related to heat retention, the pan will stay at a fairly constant temperature
one advantage is if you are using a shit heat source, like an open fire
but mainly it's so if you are looking for an exact temperature you can be confident adding food to the pan won't bugger you up
pro-tip: don't get one with a metal handle, it will get too hot to pick up without gloves or a tea-towel
mine has a wooden handle with a screw in metal rod, so you can replace the wood handle as needed, the lifespan of the handle has to match the lifespan of the pan
>>7558242
yes
It has a relatively low k value but a relatively high heat capacity. It is used in applications that require such a tool. It is indispensable in my kitchen was 20 dollars at walmart and will never have to be replaced. Not really a fucking meme. >>7558294
totally different uses for those types of pans......
>>7558800
people actually pay £300? for a FUCKING PAN?
jesus, I think I got an entire set for a tenth of that
>>7559088
I found this intereating
kind of want one, maybe a griddle one
>>7559133
>Not really a fucking meme
why are there idiots who use meme as an insult?
I can't even
>>7559088
raised some good points.
One thing worth mentioning that you brought up is that cast iron pans and electric cooktops go well together imo
the properties of the iron eliminate many of the drawwbacks of eletric coils.
How are anodized aluminum pans?
>>7559318
griddle pans are an entirely different beast
I have found that cast iron griddle pans are terrible, atually really really bad
because the cast iron doesn't radiate heat so much (if that makes sense), it requires surface contact
I have found that cast iron griddle ones just don't throw the heat up like they ought too
>>7559324
no clue senpai... no fucking clue
>>7559314
>there are people using up oxygen RIGHT NOW who buy pans in sets
>>7559524
sometimes you get a good deal on them
you can end up buying more pans than you need, stupid pans you will never use, or brands you only need one of, but Idon't see why they are bad as a rule
>>7559342
vastly superior. aluminum is lighter and conducts heat better, and hard anodizing is much less temperamental while being very durable
>>7559761
wait I thought the process makes metal porous?
isnt that what they do to aluminum parts so you can dye them?
I thought they cracked if you heate them too much and they were prone to rusting
source?
>>7559088
The screw type handles aren't durable and get loose with long term use. I use a rubber cover for my metal handle and it works great. Just slides on prior to cooking.
>>7559813
Aluminum doesn't rust.
>>7559852
It corrodes
>cooking hardware that's been used since the colonial era
>is it a meme?
>>7559326
in cast we used to use them on elecreic stoves, they really helped reduce hot patches
>>7559837
maybe rubber handles that are replaceable would work well, I dont know
we have had one with a screw handle for a hundred years, I put some new wood on it about five years ago
maybe they do get loose, I can't generalize
>>7559873
yes, that's what I mean
whether it would be a problem or not I'm not sure
>>7558242
You can move a lot of cookware that isn't cast iron memeware from stove to oven...
>>7559883
Other items from ye olden days which are meme: Handle bar mustache, type writer, penny-farthings...
You don't see that stopping the hipsters though...
Modern cookware I a million times better than cast iron for everything, in every way. But that doesn't mean cast iron I useless, and it never will be. Much like you can still write a manuscript on a type writer. you just look hellameme doing it.
ITT: no one can afford more than one kind of pan
>>7559913
lol only ghetto rettards cook in dirtey cast iron pan's
>>7559929
>>7559907
>i look "hellameme" for using a cast iron pan
>million times better in everyway
>hellameme
>comparing complicated tech like a typewriter and a computer to 2 hunks of metal
>hellameme
Whats wrong with you?
>>7558294
>copper
I love cast iron, but this. Nothing beats copper in my book. It gives me more control.
>>7558294
>niche tasks such as searing meat
>>7558319
Jesus.
>>7558322
Nah, they don't really corrode, they just get a patina from oxidation (which is accelerated with the applied heat), but most people like the more rustic look. Polishing can be performed, but it's just for aesthetics, and most people don't bother.
>>7560284
>searing meat for every meal
spot the future colon cancer fataility
>>7558322
>if you want to recommend something for the plebs
but anon, you are the plebs
>>7558298
Copper pans are expensive and they have to be tinned if you are thinking of cooking tomaro/acidic sauces/ food. I own a copper cazo (pic related). Use it to fry for large crowds and confit pork. Its suppoesed to be a superior metal to do sugar work/candy. Look at carbon steel pans similar draw backs and benefits of cast iron with less weight.
>>7560284
except that's pretty much a textbook example of a niche task
>>7561818
How so? It might be specific, but it's a very common kitchen task. Too common to be niche.
>>7561826
not really that common, but I can see why you would think so since it appears from lurking here for a while that the only meats that you cu/ck/s know how to prepare are steaks and pork chops
>>7561842
That's not true at all, we also know how to make hamburgers. It was on Chef John!
t. C. Fe. von Memester, III
>>7561842
>>7561818
searing meat is not a niche task in any way shape or form and the fact that you think it only applies to steaks and pork chops is... well i don't know how to feel about it but it's worrying. and it's a method that certainly doesn't apply to just meat anyway.
cast iron is excellent for pan roasting, butter basting, all kinds of stove or stove-to-oven stuff that requires a lot of stored heat in the pan. professional chefs absolutely love it and the backlash against it on here is what i find meme tier
>>7561842
>not really that common
You kidding me?
It's usable for just about any sort of meat (and a lot of veggies as well). And it's not just "chops" or steaks, it's great for browning the outside of a roast before it goes into the oven.
>>7561892
>>7561896
I guess searing meat is too broad of a term for what I meant; I was referring to the heavy sears that can only be applied by a cast iron skillet; those that would be appropriate on steaks/pork chops but not on things like scallops, fish, etc. the latter can be done in just about any skillet, and the slow reaction time of cast iron means that there is probably a better tool than it for the job, especially for delicate foods that are easily overcooked.
>>7558242
I like them better as a "non-stick" option than teflon pans because I've never had a telfon pan that didn't eventually flake off or get fucked even though I was super careful with them.
*shrug*
If that's a meme, than meme me up.
>>7561909
>slow reaction time
yes, cast iron is not particularly suitable for things that involve fine heat control.
but that very aspect of it is what makes it good for other things.
you can't have both.
>>7558795
> Go make a hollandaise sauce in your cast iron skillet right now and show us how it turns out.
given that you've JUST admitted it's entirely possible, this would be a stupid argumentative gambit if /ck/ were a more productive board.
i've done hollandaise in cast iron.
>>7561917
exactly, but having fine heat control is preferable for pretty much all but a few niche tasks, especially if we are talking about stovetop cookware, which brings us back to square one.
>>7561930
>pretty much all but a few niche tasks
they're not niche, loads of stuff requires good heat storage and they're very commonly used techniques ESPECIALLY in professional kitchens.
>>7561925
I don't think he was denying that it's possible, he's probably saying that unless you're incredibly skilled (read: not the average /ck/ poster) it will turn out lumpy and overall shitty
>>7561936
care to name some? not trying to be a dick here but I can't really think of too many aside from heavy searing and keeping food warm, the latter of which also has much better modern solutions such as heat lamps
>>7561951
Bump for answers
>>7561951
butter basting and pan roasting were already mentioned. quick breads. pancakes/crepes. caramelising stuff with high water content like onions/mushrooms. reduced/starch-thickened broths/sauces. stews, braises, pies. migas.
>>7559524
how much do the manufacturers pay you to shill your overpriced cookware?
I honest prefer stainless
>>7561951
They're also excellent for baking, especially high-heat: Cornbread is a classic. So are baked beans.
>>7563681
again, cast iron certainly CAN be used for these tasks but for almost all of the tasks you listed there is another tool that does the job better. heat retention provides no tangible benefits for butter basting and pan roasting, and these can be done on any roasting pan, which will likely be lighter and can be more easily moved to the oven. I will give you quick breads since I don't make those and I don't know much about them. pancakes and crepes especially are better made on a teflon coated crepe pan. Hugh heat retention does nothing for pancakes or crepes and takes away from your control over the heat, and your seasoning will never be more nonstick than a teflon pan in good condition. caramelising most vegetables most certainly does not need high heat retention; the normal way to caramelized onions is to let them cook for longer periods of time over lower heat. additionally, the presence of acids in many of these foods and the risk of iron leeching into them (inb4 seasoning, it's not foolproof and why risk leeching iron into your food when it's not necessary) makes a normal stainless/aluminum or stainless/copper a better choice, not to mention that having more control over the heat is never a bad thing. for reduced/thickened broths and sauces it is pretty much always preferable to have fine heat control in order to get the right texture and consistency. stews and braises I can agree with you, though I have my doubts that an expensive le creuset can do the job noticeably better than a crock pot or a simple oven safe earthenware casserole. pies can be made in a simple aluminum pie tin, heat retention gives you no benefits here and again cast iron is heavy and unnecessary. migas often contain acidic components like tomatoes and overheating your cast iron skillet can also overcook the eggs in the dish.
again I am not saying cast iron doesn't have its place in the kitchen, I am maintaining that they are great and indispensible tools but only for a small number of niche tasks
>>7564428
And again, those "niche" tasks are super important. Getting a good sear on meat alone might be a "niche" in your opinion, but it's very common.
>>7558631
flaxseed oil is terrible for home seasoning
you need to apply 50+ coats and it needs to be exactly to temperature or it will flake off immediately when you cook anything that isn't fatty meat and the only real benefit is that it makes your pan look darker faster
>>7564436
yes but the question is if they're a "meme" and I would maintain that they are; too many people conflate them as a do it all kind of pan, and we seem to have agreed that they're not, and not even close to it.
>>7564528
I agree with you that there are better pans for many applications--probably even a majority of applications. Whenever people ask about different kinds of pans here I nearly always reply the same thing: different tools for different jobs.
But that said, if you said I could only have one pan--especially for home cooking--I would easily choose cast iron because of it's versatility. It may not be the ideal pan for every application, but it can at least handle every application. That cannot be said for the alternatives.
In my opinion the ideal combination is three:
Stainless, for when you want to create a fond for later deglazing, as well as for acidic foods
Cast iron or carbon steel for high-heat use, searing, saute, oven use.
Nonstick aluminum for delicate foods which tend to stick easily like fish, eggs, etc.
>>7564528
only pan i use
have fun with your $1000 set of copper pans and your 1000 folds ninja knife made of astroids i am sure the guests love hearing about how expensive your cookware is every five seconds while they eat your shit tier food.
>>7564421
>heat retention provides no tangible benefits for butter basting and pan roasting
not true
>which will likely be lighter and can be more easily moved to the oven.
are you kidding me
>pancakes and crepes especially are better made on a teflon coated crepe pan.
really, really not true
>aramelising most vegetables most certainly does not need high heat retention; the normal way to caramelized onions is to let them cook for longer periods of time over lower heat.
high heat retention keeps this low heat much more stable and the higher emissivity helps drive off water a lot more evenly
i'm not gonna go through everything in your post but the whole acids in cast iron thing is a meme especially if the pan is properly seasoned. there's a reason i itemised that list: cast iron and a good stove makes all those things better than other pans. also i meant spanish migas
>>7558242
Asking if a meme is a meme is a meme.
>>7564567
>not true
>really really not true
can you at least explain yourself, it clearly isn't obvious to me why my claims are not true
>>7558783
>the best tools
If you can't cook 90% of your dishes with a mid tier pot and pan you're just wasting space
>>7564582
butter consists of water. the water gets driven off so the butter can reach a high enough temperature for the milk solids and what you're cooking to brown together. constantly moving the butter applies both the heat and the proteins and sugars in the butter evenly to what you're cooking. for the butter to keep foaming, and not burn, you need a pan that supplies very stable heat. the process of evaporation will take the heat quickly out of a pan with poor heat retention. simply put, cast iron provides a much more controlled thermal environment for this process.
this is similarly true for crepes. you want a constant, high heat source for any baked good. cast iron is an excellent material for this purpose.
>>7564601
I use butter for my morning eggs in cast iron daily, it's Kerrysgold, it has a higher fat content and lower moisture than shit tier regular super market butters. Ghee also works wonders in a cast iron pan.
>>7564601
>the process of evaporation will take the heat quickly out of a pan with poor heat retention
You're hung up on muh heat retention because it's dangerous to brown butter on cast iron with the flame on. The water would prevent burning until it's all gone, at which point your butter is fucked as the butter temperature instantly goes through the roof. So you warm up the pan and shut off the flame, letting the pan cool to a safe temperature.
With a normal pan you keep a low heat and when it's time, you make fine adjustments as needed, with the flame still on. A stove has no problem compensating for heat loss from evaporating butter. But a cast iron has a big problem adjusting when the evaporation stops, hence your workaround.
Heat retention is the enemy of control. Workarounds developed to make cast iron usable are not applicable to real cookware because they're inherently up to the task.
>>7564922
>So you warm up the pan and shut off the flame, letting the pan cool to a safe temperature.
Nope. I pay attention to the bubbles, and the moment the bubbles stop (indicating that all the water has boiled off) I then add the food. Adding the relatively cold food to the hot pan prevents the butter from burning.
>>7564922
what workaround are you talking about?
>Heat retention is the enemy of control.
i have no fucking clue how you came to this conclusion.
>>7564950
I'm not the guy you're replying to, but I think I know what he's getting at:
For some types of cooking you want to be able to control the temperature of the pan precisely. In other words, if it's too hot you need it to cool down quickly, and vice-versa. The high thermal retention of cast iron makes that difficult--think of it like how a big heavy dump truck takes a long time to accelerate and brake while a lightweight sports car can do so much more quickly.
While that is a valid point, it's also very limited--largely irrelevant even--for home cooking. The classic example where fine heat control is required is for making emulsified sauces like Hollandaise. That's not a common task for a home cook. And it's also something that would be done in a saucepan, not a skillet or "fry pan".
>>7564965
>For some types of cooking you want to be able to control the temperature of the pan precisely.
yes, but we've been over this. you WANT thermal inertia in many circumstances. butter basting is one of them.
the idea is to have some pans which conduct effectively and some which store heat effectively. why this thread has got to 150 posts arguing that you only want the former is bewildering to me.
>>7560481
spotted the vegan fuckboy who probably enjoy prostate stimulation.
>>7565139
>mfw I encounter an internet tough guy
>>7565139
who doesn't enjoy prostate stimulation
it's neurologically enjoyable
