Should a chef be able to tell his customers whether or not they can photograph their food?

So I saw this article (which is a series of food articles where people ask about their restaurant related questions) about how a sushi chef at a high end place wouldn't let his customers photograph the food he serves.

I come down pretty hard on the side that says it's silly to be taking pictures of all of your food, but also that it's the customer's food as opposed to the chefs, and they can do whatever they like to it. Not everyone's experience needs to be the exact same and it doesn't negatively effect other people's experience with their food for you to take a picture of your food.

@Serraph105:

I think by all means, it should be a decision left for the customer. Because once the food leaves that kitchen and reaches the customer, it no longer belongs to the chef. It's now a product sold to a customer.

No they should not, I think of it as intellectual property rights. People could talk pictures in attempts to copy the work.

Yeah... good luck trying to stop people from taking a picture of something they bought.

@tenaka2: People do that all the time with food. Whether for business or for pleasure, it's hard to keep a recipie a complete secret. Even if it's not copied exactly people come up with their own versions all the time.

I was a chef for about 10 years and I can honestly tell you that most chefs probably don't care what you do with their food as long as you pay for it. Now, hopefully, people eat it and appreciate it. Look at it first. Smell it. Take a bite, chew slowly and savor. And repeat. But if people want to take a photo, too, that's fine. If they want to wrap it up in tinfoil where it gets smashed up and soggy, well that's less fine, but whatever its their food. Throw it at people...whatever.

There's a certain subconscious realization that ultimately food get's eaten and turned into shit; so really, once the act of creation is done and the food has left the kitchen, it's all shit anyway, so do what you want.

Now, with that said, there are a lot of "artist types" that are chefs, so yeah, I don't find it hard to believe one or two of them out there pull the eccentric primadonna card and go "NO! No photograph my food!"

The article does make a good point, however: people need to be present during and experience, in the moment. If you're spending a few minutes taking pictures, then eating the thing (like sushi) in a manner of seconds, you're doing it wrong. You should use your mind to absorb the details, it picks up all five senses whereas a picture only reminds you of one. Even better, memory sort of romanticizes certain things;, so as time goes on that sushi dinner becomes even better. A photograph reminds you that, no, it didn't actually happen that way. Sorry but I like my memories to be fond ones and not so literal.

I don't think it has anything to do with keeping secrets. If the food was that good, then the secret is in the technique and preparation, not the presentation.

This is more about ego.

Not really. You can't take a picture of a bottle of coke and suddenly make coke.

Hell, you can't even make coke if you get the ingredients to coke (something they released) because you don't know the time, temperature, and amounts used in the preparation. You could make a poor copy or maybe even one that comes close, but it won't be the original thing.

This is why being recognized as the originator of something in the food world is so important, maybe even more important than keeping the recipe secret; you ever notice how a lot of places are called "Original ________" or "Home of the Original ______" and so forth?

Well, if they’re in the restaurant....their establishment, their rules. Make it to go.

So food has to look good as well now?

Give me the ugliest plate of looking food but the best tasting any day, I couldn't care what it looks like.

Customer's decision.

I don't care much for copyright and I feel like some creators are a little too willing to give up the rights of everyone around them as long as it caresses their self-importance. I also don't care much for the idea in the USA that a private company can do pretty much whatever they want (like censor people) if it's in their establishment. To me that is someone or a group of people feeling more important than they really are. In this case you're talking about a product you sold to a customer. It's akin to saying that if someone buys a painting from you they will have to censor it out of any future photographs. I think that's silly. The creator is not of (relative) importance here.

That's honestly how I feel about this. The chef is not important. Hardly anyone in the world cares about the chef. Even if it's a 'famous' chef. I don't think we should be forced to care because they're not that important. The idea that your ability to make food should impact what other people are allowed to do in their life is asinine imo. Of course I love creators and I want them to do well... but... I want everyone to do well. So those rights are infinitely more important than that creator's personal opinion on photographs. I'm sure there are some crazy edge cases where photographing food will intentionally directly ruin a restaurant because they can detect the ingredients and give away the secret recipe or whatever. Sure, I'm sure we can think of some crazy scenario where the ability to take a picture of food is used maliciously and avoids the law to such an extend that we should question our ability to take photographs without repercussions. In 99.9% of the cases I won't agree with this idea. Just take the damn picture if you want to.

@SoNin360: They probably haven't bought it yet.

If they've ordered it and it has been served, then they have essentially agreed to pay for it. At any rate, I don't see what harm taking a photo of some food can do regardless, aside from looking mildly obnoxious.

Ideally it looks and tastes good. But yes, flavor is the priority.

Especially when you are paying for it in a restaurant. You know the saying "People eat with their eyes first" means? It means that if something looks good to someone, it is going to taste better. It's going the extra mile to prepare something delicious, and then take the time and put in the skill to present it well.

"There's a certain subconscious realization that ultimately food get's eaten and turned into shit; so really, once the act of creation is done and the food has left the kitchen, it's all shit anyway, so do what you want."

Man, that's deep and actually makes sense.

I have a background as a chef and worked in the restaurant business for a good chunk of my young adulthood. To be honest I don't know what the fuss is if people want to take pictures of food. If anything, I always found it flattering if people wanted to take pictures of the food I made.

What a dumb argument. You buy something, it’s yours to do whatever you want with it. End of discussion.

I say that once the food is in the customer’s possession then they can do what they want outside of throwing it at people of course.

Yeah. I would be one of those really angry chefs (quite a high percentage actually) that gets really emotional and throw them out for being filthy millenials and photographing every f*cking thing so they can reminisce ten seconds later and share it with their 400 online friends they don't really know like anyone really gives a f*ck.

Just eat the god damn food and get out.

If you are reviewing it, I deserve to know in advance so I can spit in it.

I am more on the side of the customer doing what they want, but, maybe I could change my mind if the chef had an objection with good reason.

Should be up to the establishment what sort of behaviour should be restricted. I can see how the taking pictures of food could be seen as rude and detrimental to the dining atmosphere for other customers.

I believe that chefs should be allowed to scissor kick to the back of the head, anyone who posts their food online. **** millenials.

Sure, if that's the vibe they're going for, why not.

It's only fair to put a sign up at the door though, because people are going to want to do it. Sell them postcards if they're desperate.

The only argument is that people waste time on their phones taking pictures of their food and they're holding up customers that come in to the restaurant after them. People shouldn't have their phones out on the table at all. It's terrible etiquette and yes, etiquette is important. Conceit is one of the many factors that's worsening society so yeah, if I was a chef, I wouldn't want people taking pics of my food, either. I'd want them eating it before it got cold.

Some present their food like art. You can bet I would like a picture as inspiration later on. This mostly goes for desserts though.

Anybody that takes pictures of their food should be kicked out of the restaurant literally.

Not a concern of the chef anymore when it leaves the kitchen. However taking pictures of food is lame.

It smacks of snobbery. I'd probably never eat at that restaurant again.

There are many establishments who take pride in their patrons being excited about their food, enough so they'll take photos of it. Sometimes, we even posed for photos with the chef who cooked our food.