Martha Stewart takes the worst food photos, ever
No, really. Martha Stewart, the domestic goddess who can supposedly cook, decorate and get herself into and out of pleasant jail, can’t seem to operate her camera phone and take a decent food photograph to save her life.
Stewart’s Twitter bio reads “curious, inquisitive, experimental entrepreneur who cares about the world we live in.” But apparently she doesn’t care about food porn. In fact, judging from her photos, she may not know what the term means, or that it exists. Does she not look at her own magazine?
Some celebrities hire people to tweet for them, but after scrolling her feed, it’s pretty safe to say a professional had nothing to do with it. Most of the photos are poorly lit, which is something we’ve all experienced when trying to take a photo at a dark restaurant. But most are just plain awful. Some are blurry, some look neon and in some you really can’t tell what you’re looking at, no matter how long you look.
Stewart’s followers have responded to her photos on Twitter. @Danielkanter wrote sarcastically, “Too much to ask that Martha shoot more photos for the magazine? Art” while another wrote “You have to stop taking photos. Stop it.” In response to a particularly bad photo, @andyalmeida wrote "@MarthaStewart that looks terrible.”
This may seem a little harsh, but you can understand people expecting more aesthetically from a woman who seems to pride herself on good taste with a magazine, television shows, cookbooks and a line of cookware.
Stewart acknowledged the recent reaction to her pictures on Twitter with “There seems to be some buzz about my food pics. Actually the onion soup was utterly delicious and the ice berg wedge divine.” Well, it sure didn’t look like it.
Flip through some of her worst pictures in the photo gallery above and let us know what you think in the comments below.
Love to rub it in when your food porn is hotter than your friends’? Follow me on Twitter: @Jenn_Harris_
Eat your way across L.A.
Get our weekly Tasting Notes newsletter for reviews, news and more.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.