How far are we from food printing?
we can already do it to a degree its just pointless and expensive. also it's easy to 3d print something made out of a single material but if you wanted a hamburger with 40 different materials, all with different handling parameters, it'd be unrealistically complex.
Most is is already plastic so you can do it 3d printers right now
>>22065039What's the point of printing food into a different shape if said food already exists? While it might make sense to use it to create a chocolate sculpture or something, the "printing" is purely cosmetic. It's not like some Star Trek replicator, which assembles whatever you want out of pure energy.
I think we're like 10-15 years away from fully automated kitchens. Like you just stock the fridge and a robot does all the work for you. Of course only wealthy people will be able to afford it, or shit like large companies so they can fire their cafeteria staff.
>>22065050for printing my own custom chicken nuggies, just fill it with some pink slime
>>22065050>>22065057It's not about giving food a certain shape (which would be cool of course), but the science behind macronutrients/micronutrients/water combination to recreate the exact same structure of any food. There's been extense research on this topic for years, and plant-based meat is still far from the real taste of meat, so we still lack the most basic knowledge to even start to think about food printing.
>>22065039That will never be a thing outside of maybe space stations or antarcica because it's more economic to mass produce individual ingredients and automatically assemble. 3D pritning would mean slowing down the production.
>>22065061you can blend meat into fine sludge and will still taste like meatwhat does structure have to do with it?
>>22065061So you're basically talking about a free style soda machine.
>>220650390 away.It will never be viable to print food since it's structure is determined at the molecular level.Maybe a bottom up approach could work, but definitely not a top down.All 3D food printing is a scam to get investors' money.
>>22065039Food printing is already a thing, but as of right now the products from it are expensive and niche compared to the real versions. It's probably not going to be commercially viable long term. >>22065054We actually have cookbots now. You just slap ingredients into cubicles and it cooks the food for you automatically. Some Japanese restaurants have done the meme 100% robot thing for some food items. Of course they are expensive, but these things are floating about as new shit for consumers. Even got bots that mix cocktails. Realistically I think these consumer products will die on the vine, the real solution that will take off is humanoid maid robots in the kitchen. That way you have 1 expensive bot that does cooking and cleaning and you can fuck it on the side. Those are still in beta and a few years off from final use. Maybe 10 if feminists impede the dev of the tech.
According to Revelation, not that far.
>>22065039Never happening. Even if it were possible it would cost 10x as much as just making it normally.
>>22065039infinitelyNot gonna happen if we are talking about molecular compositioning.Obviously it could be filled with finely ground meat mass and batter and then basically print some nuggets, so it could be usable in niche applications like candy manufacturing where you can put ingredients like chocolate, sugar, a base cream and additional taste liquids that are mixed with it when printing etc in there.But other than that? No way. Food is more than just fat, protein and carbs which you can just mix together and "print". Take bread for example, that's a fermentation product, during fermentation a mixture of thousands of substances with god knows what relevance and properties is created.Cooking is like THE chemically most complex thing that can happen really. Just look at what happens when you put a steak into a hot pan, all those reactions, proteins denaturate, some are broken apart by the intense heat and their amino acids react again with sth else, even just the so called maillard reaction is a descriptive term for an unimaginably large group of reactions.You can basically think of the raw ingredients as collections of hundreds if not thousands of chemicals, and then you apply heat to this mixture, so they basically have enough energy to react in whatever way they want and with WHOever they want. God knows what for thousands of reactions take place in there, and they all in their total lead to the result we in the macroscopic world know.There is no way you can print such a complex mixture.
>>22065358Yes, 100% automated is usually a novelty where they make a big show out of it. Lots of cooking can be 90% automated, which is a huge benefit. The last 10% or so is fine to leave for humans to do because it's the 10% that would cost triple to automate.
>>22065039Food for the underclass
>>22065061>plant-based meatNo such thing, Anon. Your brain has been rotted by marketing and propaganda.
>>22065039im pretty sure printing chocloate is a thing. probably sugar as well
>>22065039Saw this thumbnail and thought it was something else for a second.
>>22065770Pretty stylish microwave indeed...
>>22065039I don't want to clean up supports for half an hour to eat dinner
>>22065046thats why you have a separate machine for all the components then you have the wagie assemble it
>>22065951Caramelized sugar supports.
>>22065592Yeah, all those "robo-cook" kiosks with a robo arm are just for the novelty.There are already many dishes that can 100% be machine-cooked, stews and pan/wok dishes like that obviously work best.But even with for example a hamburger, you COULD of course use a robo-arm but why would you? There are much more efficient ways, like a set of containers for the ingredients and for the patty don't put into a pan and then let the robot flip it like a human with a spatula, just close two hot surfaces under and over it. Then the burger could be assembled using a cyclinder: Bun in there from a side container, top rotates to squeeze in ketchup and other sauces, cooked patty, rotates again to the conatainer with mayo, other bun.And there you go, a perfectly edible burger, 100% robot made. It's just not as fancy and gimmicky as a robo arm acting like a human one.
>>22065072So why go through the hassle of 3d printing meat paste if the traditional shaping method of nuggies is much cheaper and faster
>>22065447I think it's more about 3d printing raw ingredients/components, the thing still needs to be cooked
>>22065358>Realistically I think these consumer products will die on the vine, the real solution that will take off is humanoid maid robots in the kitchen. That way you have 1 expensive bot that does cooking and cleaning and you can fuck it on the side. Those are still in beta and a few years off from final use. Maybe 10 if feminists impede the dev of the tech.I like the way you think, hopefully our robo maids are also fully customizable for our tastes!
chickangoodhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAx67gfWU50
>>22065050>What's the point of printing food into a different shapeI'd be able to make my dream a reality
>>22065039The part where someone has to pay tens of thousands for one since you need a hundred different materials handled in the same printer for it to work. High volume businesses would need multiple as well, so only a tiny market would be available for an experimental technology.
>>22065039Pointless endeavour, since it either involves sludgifying existing "whole" food into a textureless paste and extruding it out a tiny bunghole into a poor simulation of the original, or blending together some nutrient slop paste and squirting it out into dino nuggies for IPA drinkers. It's like turning a loaf of bread into mush, kneading it into a dough, baking it and saying you printed a loaf of bread
