The Fresh Loaf

News & Information for Amateur Bakers and Artisan Bread Enthusiasts

An all round baking calculator

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

An all round baking calculator

Hello guys and girls,


    I am a bit new on this forum, but I wanted to save ya'll some future trouble, by letting you know I just wrote a unique online calculator that calculates hydration, converts between almost anything - for example 4.63 ounces of 125% starter equals how many cups of starter, and has some other functionalities. It is hosted at:


http://www.whatsthesequency.com/cakey.php


The "other functionalities" is a pretty neat chart that maps every kind of baked good and is able to read in any recipe for baked goods and correctly place it on the chart. I like to think it's something special. Anyway, I would love any feedback ya'll have on what I wrote, corrections, etc.


Thanks,


Michael O.

jyslouey's picture
jyslouey

Need I say more? This is extremely useful for me as I would like to try out some of the recipes here that use only volume measurements and I only have a metric scale.


I will add this link to my url  favourites. Thank you

BellesAZ's picture
BellesAZ

jyslouey, ever considered getting a scale that gives you options to weigh in metric and US measures?  That way you can bake anything you like and are not bound my the metric system.  I have found freedom since buying one - best thing I ever bought for $20.00. 

jyslouey's picture
jyslouey

I have a metric scale and can easily convert lbs and oz to metric if necessary,   It's the volume measurements that I have difficulty with.

BellesAZ's picture
BellesAZ

You might find this link handy then:


http://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/cooking

jyslouey's picture
jyslouey

I find that most useful, esp as it includes a lot of other commonly used ingredients. I've added this to my favourites already and will be referring a lot to this website when I come across any interesting recipes that only come in volume measurements.  You're a star!! 

suave's picture
suave

It may have some potential but I found it a bit dreadful.  Why does a cup of water weigh 224 g?  Why does a cup of oil weigh the same 224 g?  Where are the sugars?  Why does a cup of flour weigh 124 g?  Why does it weigh anything at all - it should be a user settable number.  Why does it goes to default after conversion?

BellesAZ's picture
BellesAZ

There are some kinks that need to be worked out, but this is why he posted it here to get our feedback and the link site does say it is in Beta mode, which leads one to believe that there will be changes forthcoming.


 


Michael, thanks for the link post.  That was alot of work!  I'm glad you've asked for our feedback here.  As you can see, there are still some kinks that need to be worked out.  It's exciting that there is something I can use to convert some of my family heirloom recipes into weights and measures now.. at least some of the ingredients anyway.  Thanks again!

amolitor's picture
amolitor

A cup of water weighs 224 grams on account of it's one gram per milliliter, and there's right around 224 miliiliters in a cup.


The oil is too heavy.


The flour is probably too light. 5.5oz per cup is probably a better approximation.


Making it user-settable would be silly, though. If the user is sophisticated enough to enter this data, they're sophisticated enough to not need this calculator.

suave's picture
suave

No, there isn't

amolitor's picture
amolitor

Yes there is. Depending on the "cup" you get anywhere from 200 to 250 ml to one of them. 224 is as good a number as any if you're going to simplify life to a generic "Cup".


 

suave's picture
suave

Standard american cup is 237 (240) ml.  It's not even a subject for discussion.

amolitor's picture
amolitor

Wait, it is 237, or 240ml?


Please note that america is not the world, and do a little reading up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cup_%28volume%29


 

BellesAZ's picture
BellesAZ

but the man came in here to share something he created.. took the time and effort to publish, share with the members of this board and he asked us for "feedback".  It's great that we can critique and make suggestions, but I think the focus can be more positive.  Encouraging/helpful commentary instead of negativity like suggesting that "sophisticated" bakers won't use it - maybe they won't, but some of us "unsophisticated" bakers just might.


I appreciate that he's tried and has come in here to ask for our input.  Some of us are simply home bakers who are new to weights and measures as well as all the new terms and information.  For me, I always "thought" I knew how to bake anything and in fact, my recipes and baking have been published and awarded.  It wasn't until I came here and started branching out that I realized just how little I know about this other side to baking - even though I've been baking for 35 years!  I've been learning just how scientific it really is and how important math, conversions and overall knowledge are.. not to mention I've not had the benefit of a professional education as many other bakers here have.  It can be, extremely overwhelming.  Remember, we all started out knowing very little at some point in our lives and I just appreciate the time and effort this person took to make a handy, helpful tool.


On the flipside, I also appreciate the critique and warnings about the small details.. like water and oil not being the same weight.  I know this, but many others may not, so it is imperative that the tool be accurate.  A tool such as this, in the hands of an amateur baker like myself, can actually end up being a source of frustration if it is not accurate.


So, Michael.. don't give up on your ambitions.  I think they are noteworthy and most helpful IF they are tweaked and re-posted with accuracy. 


Thank you


 

bnom's picture
bnom

Well put. Thank you.

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

People are right, so I did correct the oil(~210g/cup) and the water(~236.6g), I will have to review the milk too. And yes, true to the name it is beta, probably 15% of where I want to have it. 


Some bakers use professional recipes and will measure their own ingredients instead of relying on a generalized conversion, understood.


5.5 ounces? so 155g/cup for what type of flour?

amolitor's picture
amolitor

It's just a number I've run across that's seemed to work pretty well, "generally".


EDIT: Which, honestly, is all you can hope for. I suspect, but do not know for sure, that there's going to be more variation in the density of the flour from factors like "it is sifted?" "how was it shipped?" "how much ambient moisture has it picked up" than from differences like bread flou versus AP flour.

jyslouey's picture
jyslouey

for all your efforts, I  agree with BellesAZ totally. I'm sure there are many here who appreciate what you are doing so please keep updating your chart/spreadsheet in spite of all the arguments and disagreements.

kneady's picture
kneady

When I first came to North America over 40 years ago and came across recipes with cup measurements, my question was what cup do I use.  I had no idea there was such a thing as a standard measuring cup. I still think it's a very old fashioned, out of date and inaccurate way of measuring.  Obviously, pioneers and pilgrims started this as they had no other way of measuring.  These days, scales are cheap and most now show both grams and ozs.  I do not mean to criticize those who still use cup measurements but am interested in why.  Good baking surely starts with accurate measuring.  My pet peeve is a recipe that gives measurements in cups and millilitres only.  Millilitres are liquid measurements.  You cannot have a millilitre of flour or sugar. Surely it is easy to give the dry ingredients in grams or ozs.

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

Okay, got it, some people don't like cups. I don't want to be rude, but bringing up a volume vs. mass discussion is a dead end; it has been discussed ad naseum. This is why I included grams as an option so you never have to use volume if that's what you like.Yeah, so no cups vs grams arguments please. thank you.


 


-Michael O.


 

BellesAZ's picture
BellesAZ

Kneady, When I lived in Australia, I followed recipes there that used measures as well, although they were metric.  It is not a North American-only technique by any stretch.  Measures made alot of sense when that's all anyone had to use.  It's how I grew up and how I watched my mother and grandmother make fantastic breads, rolls, cakes and pies.  When you're raised like this and that's how you learn to bake, using things like weights and bakers percentages are almost like learning a foreign language.  Learning a new method of baking takes one out of their comfort zone.  Now that I've baked using weights and not measures, I can't imagine baking breads any other way. 


I have to disagree that there can't be good baking when one measures instead of weighs.. my Grandmother was testimony to that.  However, I think she knew more about bakers percentages and dough than she ever gave herself credit for.  Peter Reinhart told me "The dough doesn't lie" and as long as you use that as your general guide, your baking can be satisfying and very good.


 

amolitor's picture
amolitor

The attitude that 'you must weigh to bake' is absurd on the face of it. Millions of loaves of bread, and millions of pies, and so and so forth have been made with measuring cups.

BellesAZ's picture
BellesAZ

My Grandmother was a Native American woman who baked many things using measures.  Her breads were probably baked by "feel", but also baked in a wood burning oven/stove.  Talk about a challenge!  She lived to be 102 years old.  Her pies were fantastic, her fat of choice was rendered bear fat. 


Her prize recipe was her soft dinner rolls and gorgeous breads.  She raised 9 kids on a ranch and fed not only her family, but ranch hands as well, so she baked about 20 loaves of bread EVERY DAY - with no fancy mixer.  Just a wooden spoon and a massive bowl.  She didn't measure anything when she made them.  She used her hands to "feel" the proportions.  I'd always ask her for that recipe and her answer was always the same, "A little of this and a little of that.  You'll know when it's right".. so in some ways she knew what a bakers percentage was even though if you asked her about that, she'd probably look at you like you were a bit off :)


I do miss her baking and her Indian Fry bread... wow!

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

Thanks you all, I corrected the measures you pointed out, plus some things others showed me. I think this application has gone from 0.11 beta to 0.78 beta. Meaning, I am not aware of any faults and I have added all the features for the moment. Someone mentioned adding heavy cream earlier...I'll do that.


But I do think this is the first calories counter for recipes and the first recipe conversion tool - as opposed to ingredient conversion.


Oh well.


Regards,


Michael

Dillbert's picture
Dillbert

there's still some buglets somewhere.


if individual qtys are less than a serving size seems the whole thing turns out with 0 servings.  inputting a single ingredient less than a serving size produces error msg div by zero.


100 gram serving size may not be appropriate for all recipes - perhaps a note as to what kind of recipes this works with...?


as previously noted, after conversion or review the page returned starts at the top and the user has to scroll down -


after conversion or review the "input" data is eased / disappears - there's no way to "see" you didn't typo something.


why make "conversion" optional?  if the user selects some unit to 'convert' to - just show the conversion. eliminates all the confusion of Review / Convert


in the units drop down, what is the unspecified unit and how is that handled?
(try 5 units of grated carrots | review)


there are a number of programs that do these kinds of conversions / analysis (see cookbook software)


as they get bigger and more extensive they all suffer from the typical "mouse everything" clumsiness - it's a real pain to enter the data with 300 items on a drop down lines.  elegant solution needed.  that's where the disappearing input data really hurts - you input a tedious list of stuff, hit Review, the results indicate something isn't right - no way to review, no way to correct a boo-boo without starting from scratch.  not user friendly.

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O


<inputting a single ingredient less than a serving size produces error msg div by zero.>



That is a problem. I will change this.



<100 gram serving size may not be appropriate for all recipes - perhaps a note as to what kind of recipes this works with...?>



True, 100g wont work for every recipe, but I won't change this right now. I used Au Bon Pain's (a popular restaurant) website and their baked goods were anywhere from 80g to 142g, so I chose 100g.


To determine the serving size, you have to determine the baked good from the recipe - which I can do.  It just takes a LOT of time and a LOT of programming code, so I will keep the 100g approximation until I have a financial incentive to give exact serving sizes.



<as previously noted, after conversion or review the page returned starts at the top and the user has to scroll down ->



I will change this. Starting in the middle of the page is a simple fix.



<after conversion or review the "input" data is eased / disappears - there's no way to "see" you didn't typo something.>



I don't know how to change this right now, so the fix will be farther down my list. After I get the easy stuff done, then I will search how to keep the values in the text boxes.



<why make "conversion" optional?  if the user selects some unit to 'convert' to - just show the conversion. eliminates all the confusion of Review / Convert><



You have a great idea, I am just not sure how to tell the user that choosing the last pull down menu will perform a conversion. I try having the last menu default to "Convert to:", but it makes it seem like conversion is mandatory to make the application work.



<in the units drop down, what is the unspecified unit and how is that handled?(try 5 units of grated carrots | review)>



I need to provide an error message - perhaps, but I have a quick fix.


Currently,  (try 5 units of grated carrots) assumes 1 2/3 cups of grated carrots. For 2 units of orange juice is 2 cups. This isn't right. 2 units of water doesn't make sense so I added a value to prevent a divide by zero error.



<there are a number of programs that do these kinds of conversions / analysis (see cookbook software)>



I disagree, that is an incorrect statement.



<as they get bigger and more extensive they all suffer from the typical "mouse everything" clumsiness - it's a real pain to enter the data with 300 items on a drop down lines.  elegant solution needed.>



You are right. Using <tab> and typing 'b' twice will automatially skip "bread" and "butter" and select "buttermilk". I need to tell users they can do this if this is not known.

Dillbert's picture
Dillbert

>>I disagree, that is an incorrect statement.

copied from another forum:

* Exported from MasterCook *
Per Serving (excluding unknown items): 380 Calories; 25g Fat (63.3% calories from fat); 27g Protein; 6g Carbohydrate; 1g Dietary Fiber; 104mg Cholesterol; 235mg Sodium. Exchanges: 0 Grain(Starch); 3 1/2 Lean Meat; 0 Vegetable; 3 Fat; 0 Other Carbohydrates.

I'm discounting simple "conversion" programs because there's billions of those.

the "characteristics" portion is interesting - but some kind of 'splaining is needed - what does moisture of 2 "mean"?  is 6 better than 2?

>>unit quick fix
a "unit" is an undefined qty - 1-2/3 cups of grated carrots as a "unit"...?
how is "a unit" of use?

>>tell the user that choosing the last pull down menu will perform a conversion.
idea:  show the Review page, add button(s) - "Show metric / volume measures / whatever"
tab it out - 1 cup of flour = x ounces = y grams = 237 ml (not the 224 still in the applet)
autodecipher qty unit displayed by order of magnitude for cups / pounds / grams / kilos / liters

>>Using <tab> and typing 'b' twice
pretty much all gui programs suffer this problem.
if the list starts with avocado and I'm thinking whole wheat flour, that's a lot of tabs/scrolling.
use keyboard or mouse input.  press 'w' and the list jumps to items starting with w.
no, it's not a standard windows api - you have to code it.

and while you're about coding that, solve my next pet peeve:
(example: drop down list for your state in address inputs) press M
Maine appears at the bottom of the list - doh... lots of M states . . .
put the first M occurance at the top of the list - at least the user stands some chance of mousing his choice without more scrolling/tabbing/whatever.

>>keeping values
they are passed to the applet as parameters - on startup they are by default zero.
display any non-zero values passed.

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

>>incorrect


calorie counter:  I admit there may be other programs that convert recipes to nutritional information


characteristic analysis: This has not been done before. I could use a quick explanation, very true, you are right.


hydration calculator: I don't know if this has been done before for either grams or for arbitrary units


conversion: Virtually all conversion programs only convert ingredients and  not entire recipes


>>>"Units"


Some ingredients without precise measurements like grams, may only include "2 medium mashed bananas". This is where you need units if you want to review the recipe by looking at the characteristic information. This measure is not exat, but like science class your precision is limited by your the precision you are handed. What I focus on is choosing a value that minimizes the error, sine it can never be exat, since the recipe is not exact.


The carrots option does not accurately support units, but in the case te user insists on, say " 3 units of carrots" the program currently treat 1 unit of grated carrots as 1/3 of a cup.


>>>press 'w' and the list jumps to items starting with w.
>>>>>no, it's not a standard windows api - you have to code it.


I don't understand. If I want to go to "Rum", I simply press "r" and I get "rum." I guess you are saying this is not the case in Windows Operating Systems. Strange, never knew this.


>>keeping the values


I finished this.

gary.turner's picture
gary.turner

I would propose some sort of sanity check be performed.  It is something I do for any recipe that uses volume measurements, especially for the flour.  For example, a common bread recipe might call for 4 cups bread flour and 12 oz of water.  If the flour is sifted into the cup, expect 4 oz avoir. per cup, yielding 75% hydration.  If the flour is spooned into the cup, expect 4.5 oz avoir. per cup,  and 66.7% hydration.  For scoop and scrape, expect 5 to 5.5 oz avoir. and 60 down to 55% hydration.


These differences make or break the recipe. Plugging the sample values into the calculator yields  73% hydration, indicating the calculator defaults about 4 oz avoir. per cup; about what you'd expect for sifted cake flour, but not for scooped bread flour. Disastrous for breads.


I'd suggest a user-set value for measurement method, or for expected weight per cup. Or, did I miss that entirely?


cheers,


gary

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

I understand your concerns about flour weight, but let me first say, the calculations are correct. I won't argue this point.


Nice try, 4 cups of bread flour and 12 oz water will not yield a hydration of 66.7%,


One assumption of these calculations is that you use standard techniques and all instructions were followed; I have had this discussion before, and while technically accurate it's completely unreasonable to hypthesize the situation where someone scoops and levels their flour when sifting is called for; just to show a false weight deviation.


Also, your scenario of using 4 cups of bread flour and 12 oz. of water is fatally flawed by your own definition. The core problem still remains that the user does not know the weight of the recipe creators 4 cups, by your argumentation the amount of flour in the original 4 ups would still be a mystery, regardless of how I write my calculator. I can't change that core problem, I don't write recipes.


The only aspect of my procedure that is theoretically affected by the deviation in cups of flour is the chart. But like I said the chart is good, if there is something wrong with the chart - which there isn't, just look at how pretty and logical it is - then I would appreciate it if anyone can tell me what it is.


-Michael O.


 

Dillbert's picture
Dillbert

>>Or, did I miss that entirely?


having the user 'set' the flour density is (a) another input to bother them about and (b) I'd wager the huge majority couldn't pick a proper number and (c) you can't even lump it by AP/bread/whatever because the density of Brand X AP is different than the density of Brand Y AP


expert bakers apparently don't care because they know how a dough is supposed to feel.


intermediate bakers weigh things and have tweaked their volume recipes plus have mental or other notes about how much a cup of their flour weighs.


new bakers don't have a scale, make bricks and wonder why.


you're right about the sanity check - but the first part of the sanity check involves a question for the "I never made bread before" cook who opts to do homemade bread as a central element in the "boss is coming to dinner" scenario. 


experience counts - certainly in baking.
a scale is very useful for the untried recipe, but it is more useful in being able to consistently produce a good result from a known recipe.


 

BellesAZ's picture
BellesAZ

Experience certainly does count!  Sorry, but I laughed a bit with your "boss coming to dinner" scenario.  ROFL  Certainly a sin committed by a baker who has no respect for the bread they are baking. 


Since becoming a member here and using a scale, I can't imagine my baking life without one.  I also find myself having a difficult time discussing baking with anyone who doesn't use a scale.  Does that make me a budding baking snob? :)


What are thoughts about converting a cup measure recipe to a weighted one?  I have an old recipe for my Grandmothers bread that I'd sure love to tackle with a measure.  Hers calls for AP flour. 

gary.turner's picture
gary.turner


I understand your concerns about flour weight, but let me first say, the calculations are correct. I won't argue this point.



The hydration calculation is correct only under one measurement method.



Nice try, 4 cups of bread flour and 12 oz water will not yield a hydration of 66.7%,



If the flour weighs out to 4.5 oz per cup, it does. 12÷18=.667



One assumption of these calculations is that you use standard techniques and all instructions were followed; I have had this discussion before, and while technically accurate it's completely unreasonable to hypthesize the situation where someone scoops and levels their flour when sifting is called for; just to show a false weight deviation.



It is a poor assumption.  There are a number of "standard techniques" for measurement.  Your calculator appears to expect sifted flour.  That is unreasonable for most bread makers, who would more likely use scoop and level or spoon and level.  As another poster mentioned, I also fluff the flour in its canister before scooping, and have gotten 4.5 oz. cups over many repitions.  That is important to know when trying a volume based recipe.  That's where the sanity check comes in.  By calculating the hydration rate at various presumed cup weights, and selecting the value that seems appropriate, I can determine the author's equivalent weight and adjust accordingly.



[again] it's completely unreasonable to hypthesize the situation where someone scoops and levels their flour when sifting is called for; just to show a false weight deviation.



So add a user configuration element of measuring method; sift, spoon and level, or scoop and level.  Frankly, I have no idea how my great aunt Hallie measured flour for bread.  I know she sifted for cakes, and I imagine she scooped for bread.  Her recipes don't say, but I can infer she scooped because a sane hydration level would indicate about 5 oz per cup.  Your calculator will be in serious error if I can't configure a cup as 5 oz, or at least as scooped and you hard code the method's  weight as, say 5 oz.

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

Mr. Gary,


I will look at the bread flour measurement again. I will reach a conclusion by the weekend. I believe you, you are right about the unreasonable bread flour measurement. Let me plug in 130-135grams and see what I get.


 


Michael O.


 

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

I have changed the all purpose flour to 140g/cup, the bread and whole wheat to 130g/cup, and rye flour to 122g/cup; also the starter weights changed slightly. These are place holder for now, albeot pretty decent ones. There are few reliable sources for theis information of the internet. King Arthur Flour's Master Baker Weight list doesn't have has an unfilled entry for rye flour, Convert-me.com mentioned earlier gives 1 cup of flour as 90grams.


I am still thinking about when the gram conversion will come into play. I want to minimize it's role if necessary. In other words I don't want user's to see it if they don't need it; a "change defaults" option?


I now have eggs grouped to gether as "Eggs, large -> Egg Yolk, large -> Eggs, Medium, etc."


I corrected the page-starting-at-the-very-top-of-the-page problem.


As far as the sanity check, A fairly decent sanity check, or verification procedure, can be implemented based on the chart, i.e. making sure a recipe does't fall outside the baked goods region, but that would take a really long time - perhaps four straight days of programming..


Thanks to everyone who has helped so far.


-Michael O.

kneady's picture
kneady

Re. my previous post, I think subsequent posts have proven my point. Weight is the only accurate method for dry ingredients and volume  (or weight) for wet ingedients.  It is very difficult to convert cups to weight without experimenting one's self as everyone has different ways of filling a cup and different flours can vary considerably volume to weight. If you are using a recipe which gives cup measurements, your cup measurements could be entirely different in weight than that in the recipe.


I am sure many people get excellent results from using only cup measurements. If one has been using the same recipe for years, filling the cup the same way, then, obviously, everything will turn out fine. My mother baked on a range where the oven had no controls and the heat came from the coal fire next to it. She didn't even use cups, just a handful of this and a pinch of that.  Her baking was always excellent. 


New and inexperienced bakers need to start off on the right foot, which is using weight. It's easy, simple and needs no guessing.  I admire Michael O. for his efforts but, in the end, everyone's cup measurement is different.


I have great respect for those who can produce excellent results using only cup measurements.  Myself - I am not that good a baker. I need my scales!

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

comment deleted by poster. Have a nicer day!


 


 

kneady's picture
kneady

Oh dear! Michael_O.  I have debated whether or not to bother replying to your posting as I think you are being overly sensitive.  Re-reading my post, I can find nothing that could possibly be construed as maligning what you are doing.  I am sure many will benefit from your efforts. However, in you second paragraph, you are proving my point that everyone's cup measurement weighs differently.  For instance, you state that you are using 140g per cup of AP flour.  This is an arbitrary measurements which you have decided to use. Can I make it clearer! If I am using a recipe that states "1 cup or 140g of flour", I would use the weight measurement. If I don't have a scale, I would have to go by the cup measurement but my cup measurement is, say,  145g or maybe 150g, not 140g.  I am quite sure many people use nothing but cup measurements and get perfect results every time and, in some recipes, a few gms. difference won't affect the results. I am just trying to point out that, if one has been using only cup measurements but wants to convert to weights, they would have to weigh the amount THEY usually put in a cup not rely on someone else's interpretation of what a cup measures.


I am truly sorry if I offended you.  That was certainly not my intention. No hard feelings I hope and, in the end, "to each his own."  

BellesAZ's picture
BellesAZ

Kneady, I am not sure where the confusion happened, but speaking only for myself, I didn't notice anything about your comments that should have elicited that type of response, but as we all know, the written word can be misunderstood so easily - particularly in social networking situations.  Michael O., I think you overreacted to something that was never intended. 


Kneady, your remaining comments, however, made me pause to think that what you're saying is exactly what I was stewing over last night.  I have a bread recipe that I really love, when the recipe comes together perfectly.  However, it calls for cups, not weights and I got to thinking about how I might calculate that recipe based on weight and it concerns me that if I do, the recipe could be all wrong.  It was a recipe from my grandmother.  Usually when I bake them, they turn out just great.  Once in a great while something goes amiss.. which I now know is my measures.  I will have to bone up on my bakers math and try and dissect it maybe. 


I wished I had learned from an early age, about baking with weights and not measures.  It has really transformed my way of thinking when I begin to bake and it has made such a huge difference in what I undertake and has opened up a whole new world of formulas to try!

gary.turner's picture
gary.turner

Quote:
I have a bread recipe that I really love, when the recipe comes together perfectly.  However, it calls for cups, not weights and I got to thinking about how I might calculate that recipe based on weight and it concerns me that if I do, the recipe could be all wrong.  It was a recipe from my grandmother.  Usually when I bake them, they turn out just great.  Once in a great while something goes amiss.. which I now know is my measures.  I will have to bone up on my bakers math and try and dissect it maybe.
You may be approaching this backward for your purpose. Instead of applying some arbitrary value as the weight of a cup of flour, measure out the recipe's flour as you usually do, then weigh it and note the weight (and the mixing results, i.e. too wet, too dry, just right).  Do this several times to determine your cup measure's weight. Then, you can measure by weight with some degree of confidence. Having the knowledge of what your personal cup weighs, you can apply that to other recipes with volume measurements.

cheers,


gary

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

I don't think my post was necessary, it was based on a misunderstanding,. I understand your point now. Early on I asked politely for no "cups vs. grams" arguments to avoid a separate never-ending battle, and of course people began with a cups vs. grams argument until it died out then I saw another post specifically titled "cups vs weight". This is why I thought the post was malicious, but someone messaged me clarified what kneady wrote.

BellesAZ's picture
BellesAZ

Glad that's cleared up.  On a seperate note, I've been trying to take a recipe based on measures and using your calculator am converting it.  Will give it a try tomorrow to see if it works and will let you know.

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

For the past few days I have been working on a few additions after some input and messages from forum members. I have now added a hydration calculator:


You can input separate bakers percentages for ingredients to get the overall hydration, essentially Baker's Math.


You can input hydrations of a few starters (70%,100%,125%), for example:


Scenario 1: Determine the final hydration: 25% of 100% starter and 395 grams of bread flour, 240g of water ;


Scenario 2: Determine what hydration you need for any portion of a recipe if you know the final dough hydration. This takes a little trial and error on the part of the user.


Scenario 3: Convert bakers percentages into weight/volume, vice verse


I have not tested/calibrated these results with known calculations thus far. I have just done some intuitive checking, so before using the bakers percentage derived hydration results, I would suggest checking these. Testing by me will be done later after I take a break. I was too busy programming....


Other additions: I have added user defined values and will probably not because its only good for converting recipes, but will take a lot of programming effort. I may add scaling in the future. Okay. I may also rereview some of the past suggestions to make sure this application is useful for users.


Just to clear up confusion, these calculations have nothing to do with cups/volume unless you specifically state you want cups. Thank you, everyone for your continued input.


Here is the link to the calculator, once again
Baking Calculator


 

Judon's picture
Judon

I just looked at your calculator and entered a pita bread formula that I make every week but didn't see salt as an ingredient. I also use extra virgin olive oil which isn't listed.


On hydration of starters - Jeffrey Hamelman's starter hydrations of 60% or 125% are used in a lot of breads - the lowest on your calculator was 70%.


Thanks,


Judy


 


 

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

I will need to add 60% hydration starter, I can do this by the week's end.


for Extra Virgin Olive Oil just choose canola oil.


Salt has no effect on the hydration calculations so it is omitted

Judon's picture
Judon

this thread got so long I lost track of your original intent - so of course salt is omitted!


Judy

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

Yes, this is why I tried to find a nice way to tell people, "don't make this into a separate cups vs. weight debate", but I apparently failed. I feel it is important to only address the original poster in forums, otherwise private messaging other members in the discussion is better.


 


 

AnnaInMD's picture
AnnaInMD

eom

 

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

Finally, I have finished the baking calculator. There is now a user-definable scaling option that includes sugar and salt, for those who loathe "cups" simply enter weights. I also expanded the inputs to 9 fields, which I think is sufficient for many applications. 

Caveat: My baking percentage uses all dry ingredients (flours) as the 100%.  This can change the calculations slightly. I have a link to modern baker's spiced cookies ([1]) so you can compare their weight-to-bakers percentage calculation to mine. 

Have fun.

dhass's picture
dhass

Hi Michael

I don't see yeast on your calculator.

Dave

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

I have now added: SAF Yeast  and Instant Yeast - which is supposedly the same density as active yeast. I will decide what I should do about that. The instant yeast's "unit" is a 2 1/4 tsp packet.

About an app. Good idea. I have to research that, I am thinking this would only be practical on an iPad due to the necessary layout and size. I need to know how it looks on a Blackberry, iPhone, etc.

 

bnom's picture
bnom

Turn this into an app!

BKSinAZ's picture
BKSinAZ

I also would like to see INSTANT YEAST into ACTIVE YEAST conversion. 

AnnaInMD's picture
AnnaInMD

that 1 cup of water weighs more in grams than 1 cup of flour ?  

anna

 

MIchael_O's picture
MIchael_O

Yes , 1 Cup of water is about 236.6g, I forget the exact number.

AnnaInMD's picture
AnnaInMD

seems you put a lot of work into this, very nice of you to share.

Anna