Camera Logging Test
Just came online this afternoon, for me anyway.
I did give it a couple shots with supper and I realized that this is a restaurant tool. If you’re fixing meals at home with packaging, you have your nutrition information there, that’s ultimately more accurate.
My only comment at this point is that when I camera logged my brisket point, it logged the brisket properly, however, the volume was light. I weighed 5 ounces, the camera logging said 0.33 cup.
Comments
-
I had St. Louis style pork spareribs tonight, which camera logging initially tagged as pork belly. I changed the camera angle so the short bones were a little more obvious and it got it right, to include the paprika Memphis style dry rub.
Fairly close on amount, camera logging tagged “1 cup - 245 g.” The actual weight, bones-in was 8.6oz. The bones and cartilage weighed 1oz. Actual meat was 7.6oz, 215.5g.
I’m used to meat being discussed in terms of weight. So, it throws me off to hear about meat in terms of volume or mass. That’s just me, I understand the AI is probably doing some geometry to figure all this out.
-
How did you end up trying the camera logging? I still don't have an option for it as a beta tester.
-
I still try it in restaurants, I don’t eat out much, and I don’t often eat a full meal in restaurants (bring some home). This works really well and is pretty accurate. Although you buy a 8oz steak (in the US) photo logging logs it as 1 cup.
I’ll typically order a big steak, then eat part of it, and try to adjust the portions and wind up editing the photo logging entries to get it to closer to what I ate.
It’s more accurate to use barcode logging at home. If it’s something like meat I weigh it, so photo logging isn’t useful.
If you have sent your Beta information in per the pinned comment in the beta testing channel, email beta@cronometer.com and tell them that you want to test this.
I’d like to hear more feedback about it in the forums, and maybe learn better practices and make photo logging more useful for me.