So I was eager to read Alice's review of the new Shelburne Steakhouse.... all in all I'm pleased but there's one little bit that's got me confused. Maybe it's just a question of photographic proportions?
The review is here: http://7d.blogs.com/blurt/2010/07/alice-eats-shelburne-steakhouse-saloon.html
There are some photos of the food, and the second photo is of the tenderloin medallions plate. The text says this:
When the aforementioned tenderloin medallions arrived, I understood why the dish (pictured at right) was only $16. The portion of meat was just north of minuscule.
I've reread this three or four times, and looked at the photo many more, and I'm trying to work out how that's a "just north of minuscule" portion. That looks like there's at least four (maybe five) slices of tenderloin that are each around two or three green beans thick and regular tenderloin sized. I admit I'm mostly extrapolating from the green beans because I figure I've got a pretty good idea of what sizes those are, and it seemed to me that the meat portion isn't that small. Perhaps the photo isn't giving enough of good view of it, or there's some photography issue here that I'm not aware of? Something to do with perspective?
Or maybe it's just because my smaller stomach makes me think "man, that's a lot of food!".
Anyway, I was just curious about it because the photo seemed to me to be at odds with your description and I was puzzled by it because I've never had that happen with one of your reviews before.