FOOD - Live from the Mariner - April 2 - 20

[pingpong1]

Well, apparently their current beef supplier isn't working out too well for them. So maybe Costco would be the "way to go". :p I don't think it could be any worse.....and would probably save them a ton of money, at the same time!

[Winner]

Costco now sells prime beef, as well as choice. Since Regent advertises prime beef in Prime 7, Costco would seem to be better than the current supplier--and the beef would be as advertised.

[Emperor Norton]

...

 

 

 

You don't think this largesse was influenced by the fact that you have a Premium drinks package? I believe it's been suggested elsewhere on these boards that this is the case--you get a larger pour if you have the package, because they'd rather serve you less often. We certainly experienced generous cocktail sizes on our Oceania trip, with the Premium package.

 

This is what I experienced on my Oceania cruise - much to the chagrin of the bribe-happy group getting short pours.

[Hambagahle]

This is what I experienced on my Oceania cruise - much to the chagrin of the bribe-happy group getting short pours.

 

We don't drink in bars much but towards the end of our TA cruise on Riviera we ventured out to Martinis - more out of curiosity than anything else. We ordered two "classic" martinis. To our surprise they came in individual shakers. When the drinks were poured the shakers were left for us to top up our drinks later. (and yes, we had the Premium package...)

 

I asked the Head Bartender about this practice since I had never seen it anywhere else. He said that it was standard procedure except during "Happy Hours". Apparently then, when they cut the prices per drink they also reduce the size of the drink. Otherwise one gets what we did... we enjoyed it so much we went back the next night. Good thing we were getting off the ship the following day or it could have become a habit.

[Travelcat2]

Surprised to see this thread pop up again. In terms of "shaker" martinis, they are available at many restaurants in our local area. We avoid them completely because the remainder of your drink is in shaker with ice that will dilute your drink. We much prefer having a "straight up" martini that we can sip and not have it become watery.

 

I did not notice those of us with the "premium package" receiving stronger drinks than anyone else. However, we did order doubles most of the time so it could have appeared that way to some people. As I've mentioned, drinks where we live are a bit stronger than on Oceania. We have observed that the alcohol pours in Canada and the U.K. are similar to on Oceania. For this reason, we only order beer or wine when we leave the U.S.

 

Obviously, if you enjoy a few drinks and even experimenting with new cocktails, Regent is a better cruise line for that than Oceania. I find it interesting that some Oceania posters claim that they do not want alcohol included as they feel as if they are paying for other people to drink and they do not drink very much. On the other hand, there are threads all the time about how much wine or alcohol you can bring on board. There seems to be a lot of drinking going on in the staterooms on Oceania while on Regent the majority of the passengers are in the lounges. Just an observation.

[TrulyBlonde]

TC2,

I do not know if Regent is better, but on O I believe you can bring your own wine on board and pay the corkage fee. I saw many bringing in their own bottles to the dining room while on our Alaska cruise on Regatta. We also exchanged our spirits provided in our suite for 6 bottles of wine. They were stored for us and brought to us promptly whenever we wanted to drink it.

Many also buy the wine package on O and make their selections from there.

[Travelcat2]

I have read about passengers taking wine to dinner and paying the corkage fee. This is an area where I am cheap, if I have to pay a corkage fee, I would rather drink in my cabin. If we want a really good bottle of wine, we buy it in port and drink it in the restaurant on Regent (no corkage fee).

 

The wine package is a good alternative but we found the wine selection on Oceania very limited. We were able to find drinkable wines but not a lot of choices (if you only like Cabernet Sauvignon with occasional tastes of other reds).

[Emperor Norton]

 

...Here in the US most people eat prepared & frozen foods from major manufacturers(guaranty to give hi blood pressure w/ all the salt & sugar added). ...

 

Citation please.

 

Even the Chinese food here has no relation to the food I had in China while touring there for over a month back in May of 1984.

...

 

Yes, the cat is missing from the dishes.

[Emperor Norton]

Sorry but no matter how the food looks or tastes, if you are not a photographer of food and don't have the right tools, even a meal at a Michelin starred restaurant will not look appetizing. You can't cook a meal without the right pots and pans and spices, nor does a Kindle take a decent photograph. Lighting of food is very important - and most of these snapshots don't do it justice.

 

I find it odd that those that don't post travelogues or pictures would nay-say those that do. Perhaps in the future you could take the time and effort to follow TC2s example, albeit with professional quality photos.

 

Good food photographs require more than just good lighting - they generally required doctored food. That milk on the cereal? thats Elmers white glue. That Big Mac is actually a combination of about a dozen big Macs. That Michelin starred dish was made very carefully in the kitchen for the sole purpose of being photographed - it will likely not be plated that way during busy service nor will it be standing that way after the waiter/runner rushes it to the table. That is a good food photo is inherently dishonest. It's generally not what you're going to be served. Also when served it's going to lack all the lighting the pro used - so again it won't look like that amazing picture. I prefer the wonkily lit, not plated well photos. Why? Because that's what the food actually looks like. That's how its actually arranged. Those photos are far more honest than something that will grace a brochure.

Edited May 31, 2015 by Emperor Norton

[Travelcat2]

I find it odd that those that don't post travelogues or pictures would nay-say those that do. Perhaps in the future you could take the time and effort to follow TC2s example, albeit with professional quality photos.

 

Good food photographs require more than just good lighting - they generally required doctored food. That milk on the cereal? thats Elmers white glue. That Big Mac is actually a combination of about a dozen big Macs. That Michelin starred dish was made very carefully in the kitchen for the sole purpose of being photographed - it will likely not be plated that way during busy service nor will it be standing that way after the waiter/runner rushes it to the table. That is a good food photo is inherently dishonest. It's generally not what you're going to be served. Also when served it's going to lack all the lighting the pro used - so again it won't look like that amazing picture. I prefer the wonkily lit, not plated well photos. Why? Because that's what the food actually looks like. That's how its actually arranged. Those photos are far more honest than something that will grace a brochure.

 

Agree with you 100%. Sometimes professional photographers have a hard time looking at the type of photos that I posted. Could be that, with all of the wonderful computer technology available to everyone (although I don't use it) professional photography may be a dying art.

 

P.S. loved your Elmer's Glue reference;-)

Edited May 31, 2015 by Travelcat2

[ChatKat in Ca.]

I find it odd that those that don't post travelogues or pictures would nay-say those that do. Perhaps in the future you could take the time and effort to follow TC2s example, albeit with professional quality photos.

 

Good food photographs require more than just good lighting - they generally required doctored food. That milk on the cereal? thats Elmers white glue. That Big Mac is actually a combination of about a dozen big Macs. That Michelin starred dish was made very carefully in the kitchen for the sole purpose of being photographed - it will likely not be plated that way during busy service nor will it be standing that way after the waiter/runner rushes it to the table. That is a good food photo is inherently dishonest. It's generally not what you're going to be served. Also when served it's going to lack all the lighting the pro used - so again it won't look like that amazing picture. I prefer the wonkily lit, not plated well photos. Why? Because that's what the food actually looks like. That's how its actually arranged. Those photos are far more honest than something that will grace a brochure.

 

Yes, I know that - I don't post my work here and I don't photograph typical travel photography. For me, photography is my vocation and I sell my art. I don't post it on the internet or on websites that terms of service will cause you to relinquish your copyright.

Edited May 31, 2015 by ChatKat in Ca.