So you want to be a Test Kitchen intern: Meet Rachel Sherman

Here at the L.A. Times, we put the “test” in Test Kitchen. And sometimes we feel a little more like mad scientists than trained chefs.

Not only do we test (and routinely retest) every recipe that runs in the paper but we also then re-create and style those recipes for food shoots to appear both online and in print, coordinate and shoot step-by-step demonstrations and videos of various cooking techniques, and prepare for recipe demonstrations that air on KTLA-TV‘s afternoon news. When we’re not actually working with food, we’re tracking down reader email requests for the Food section’s popular Culinary SOS column.

In addition to our full-time staff, we host interns from culinary schools all over the United States, including international students. These students receive hands-on training as they learn the finer points of recipe testing and development. The students also learn tips for food styling and interact with chefs, writers and food professionals of all kinds.

Over the last few months, I’ve introduced some of our recent Test Kitchen interns, including Amanda Burrill, Jonathan Wing and Annie Rouleau Dean, on loan from Le Cordon Bleu College of Culinary Arts in Los Angeles; Stephanie Luu from the Los Angeles Trade-Technical College’s professional baking program; and Steve Braslaw from the Culinary Institute of America in St. Helena, Calif. Here I introduce Rachel Sherman, also from the Culinary Institute of America campus in New York. -- Noelle Carter

I arrived at the Test Kitchen fresh out of culinary school. I came in ready to bolt like a runner at the Olympics. I’m here. I’m excited. Let’s. Cook. Everything. It took me a little while to learn that a test kitchen doesn’t necessarily run like a restaurant -- we don’t have to serve 250 people or more by the end of a shift. Here at The Times, we work in teams of two to dissect and prepare recipes so they are ready for the readers to make at home. In fact, my first day at the Test Kitchen, I went shopping. At a local grocery store. Just like a Times reader would.

Shopping for ingredients may not sound like a big deal, but let me tell you, it is a big part of our job here in the Test Kitchen, and it is not always as easy as it sounds. Take our recent recipe for Perbacco’s pine honey nut tart.

After a reader requested the tart recipe for our Culinary SOS column, I contacted the restaurant. The pastry chef was more than happy to share her recipe with us. When I received the recipe, I looked it over before testing -- the ingredients looked pretty straightforward, so I headed to the local supermarket to pick everything up.

A rich dessert with a buttery pastry crust and sweet pine nut filling, the tart has light floral essence from one key ingredient: Tasmanian honey. After scouring the grocery shelves, I realized this was no common honey. In fact, it can be pretty hard to find.

I tried a few more stores on my way back to work, thinking I might find it elsewhere. No such luck. I walked into the kitchen with my head down in failure. Well, I was told, better start sourcing. And source I did. I called gourmet food store after health food store after international grocery store trying to track down this elusive honey. Can we not just substitute, I pleaded? No; it would change the entire dish.

Finally, I started calling cheese shops. I tracked down the honey at the Cheese Store of Beverly Hills of all places. You need honey? Check the cheese shop, of course.

Honey in hand, I could finally test the recipe. We started with the crust, a fairly standard pastry crust recipe. The chef gave plenty of helpful details, including chilling times, specific rolling dimensions for the tart, everything we could want. Still, the first time my partner and I rolled out the dough, it crumbled into a million pieces. What could have gone wrong? A mistake in measuring perhaps? Not enough liquid?

We looked over our notes and tried the dough again, to see if we’d missed something. The second time the dough worked fine. Still, when we went to fit the dough into the pan, we realized we would have dough leftover. We tested the dough again, to double-check our results and the yield (notice a pattern here?). Again, the dough worked fine, but it still made too much. We scaled down the recipe by one-fourth and tried it again. Perfect.

Time to test the filling. We combined the ingredients in a saucepan on the stove to bring to a boil. My partner and I got caught up reading ahead in the recipe, and before we realized it, the filling had boiled all over our workspace. I’m sure you can guess where this is going -- we had to do it again. The next time, we fixated on the pot, immediately taking it from the heat just as it came to a boil, just like the pastry chef wrote.

I poured the filling into the tart shell and slid it in the oven, excited to finally see the finished product. Halfway through baking, I realized I had forgotten to measure the yield of the filling. (We take everything very seriously in the Test Kitchen -- measuring yields, keeping track of times, looking for all sorts of visual indicators to help our readers, and testing and retesting for consistent results.) I knew I would have to make the tart yet again so my recipe notes would be complete. On the plus side, the tart was a major hit with Food section staff and other L.A. Times employees who came in to help eat our tests, so one more test would not be a problem.

We tested the recipe once more to check everything from start to finish. After the recipe was edited, we proofread it and sent the recipe on its way. To see a recipe finally published is the most rewarding part of working here. We get requests from all over the country and being able to help someone cure a craving, relive a memory or give a gift is worth all the time, phone calls to chefs, and grocery store runs it takes to make that recipe perfect.

-- Rachel Sherman

You can follow my culinary adventures at compulsivebaker.wordpress.com.