ThePortForum.com

Wanted: a high-resolution picture of a port stain, on white paper, caused by the bottom of a glass. Please email to me.

Requirements:

• Circular or part-circular, approx 5cm to 6cm diameter, stain caused by a wine glass.
• Red: neither pale brown nor young purple. Hence, approximately, mature but not old.
• High-quality high-resolution image, not abused by image manipulation.
• Visually arresting.
• Sender to promise never to reveal house/shipper, nor the exact year. An approximate vintage (e.g., ‟nineteen-seventy-something”) is fine, but the house must remain secret, and hence so must the exact year.
• Sender to undertake that it was fine port.
• Sender to grant me exclusive right to use as I see fit, with no attribution other than in this thread.

Thank you.

Alterations: ‟diameter” replaces ‟radius”, error having been noticed by Glenn E.

It is very probable that this might become available Tuesday in London, but am I right to assume you require plain white paper - a tasting mat would not work?

benread wrote:plain white paper

Yes please. Plain white. Photographed from above so not foreshortened.

If made at a TPF tasting several would be ‘in the know’ about which house. Ideally all would undertake never to reveal.

I've found that the scanner is actually a better choice...
I believe Josh and I may have to find a moment to perhaps try a bottle of an 03 niepoort from magnum.

jdaw1 wrote:

• Red: neither pale brown nor young purple. Hence, approximately, mature but not old.
• !
• Sender to promise never to reveal house/shipper, nor the exact year. An approximate vintage (e.g., ‟nineteen-seventy-something”) is fine, but the house must remain secret, and hence so must the exact year.

g-man wrote:I believe Josh and I may have to find a moment to perhaps try a bottle of an 03 niepoort from magnum.

So that won’t work for at least one, and maybe two reasons.

jdaw1 wrote:

benread wrote:plain white paper

Yes please. Plain white. Photographed from above so not foreshortened.

If made at a TPF tasting several would be ‘in the know’ about which house. Ideally all would undertake never to reveal.

Unless of course we had an extra piece of white paper upon which we all undertook to place a wet glass at some stage. All any of us will then know is the general era, being 1980-something. Would that do? I assume as long as stains are not overlapping you can cut out the one required?

jdaw1 wrote:

• •Circular or part-circular, approx 5cm to 6cm radius, stain caused by a wine glass.

That's a rather large circle for a glass. Without actually measuring, I would guess that the diameter of the base of my Riedels is roughly 6 cm.

jdaw1 wrote:

• High-quality high-resolution image, not abused by image manipulation.

Do you have a minimum resolution in mind?

I can produce 3072 x 2304 images (7.1 megapixel) with my camera, but they will be high quality JPEGs. My camera does not have a raw mode.

Glenn E. wrote:That's a rather large circle for a glass. Without actually measuring, I would guess that the diameter of the base of my Riedels is roughly 6 cm.

My error: I meant diameter. Sorry. Fixed above.

Glenn E. wrote:I can produce 3072 x 2304 images (7.1 megapixel) with my camera, but they will be high quality JPEGs. My camera does not have a raw mode.

Monstrous! Excellent thank you.

In that case, I have a suitable bottle that I will open for a poker party tomorrow (Saturday) night. I believe that it will fit all other requirements with the only potential problem being color. Which, of course, I will not be able to determine for sure until I decant. More anon.

I might have a situation this saturday =)

will surprise!

Bonus request: show the pictures to nobody else. That might facilitate people not knowing which picture was selected for my purpose.

g-man wrote:I've found that the scanner is actually a better choice...

I suppose it would depend on the precise need that Julian has for the image, but in most cases I suspect you are correct. I'll see if I can get my wife to take the Port stain I create in to her office and scan it so that Julian has both options available. I also intend to photograph both with and without flash.

Glenn E. wrote:I suppose it would depend on the precise need that Julian has for the image

Adobe Illustrator, with various text and text-like elements, and then printed onto white.

I had a great bottle for the task: G94. Last bottle remaining in the almost-packed apartment.

Slight problem. Took it down from above kitchen cupboards this morning (temporary wine storage place), and, err, the bottle was rather light. Some scallywag had opened it and drunk the contents. Nightmare crisis disaster!

I have created two stains using the dregs of the bottle, but to me both appear to be rather light in color. I'll let them dry and hopefully they'll darken up enough to be useful. Since I used the dregs, there are signs of fine sediment in the stains. If that is not acceptable, I can easily create more.

I can post or email a picture of them later if you'd like to see them, just let me know. As for now, I'm off to play some poker!

Sediment can be fine; more is definitely not going to hurt. Thank you.

I've found that either young ports or just incredible potent ports make the best stains..

I've had no luck tonight as someone got a burger grease stain streaked across mine!!!!

I have good news and bad news.

The good news is that point six has been enthusiastically confirmed by multiple sources. The bad news is that I am unable to make any additional stains from this bottle.

benread wrote:Unless of course we had an extra piece of white paper upon which we all undertook to place a wet glass at some stage. All any of us will then know is the general era, being 1980-something. Would that do? I assume as long as stains are not overlapping you can cut out the one required?

Fantastic! (And apologies for my failing to notice this earlier.)

Reminder for those drinking tonight: this is still wanted.

> Put piece of paper with port wine stain in a plain brown envelope inside leather briefcase

> Wear pink carnation and go to Kensington Gardens

> Sit on the third bench to the left of the Albert Memorial

> You will be approached by a man wearing a trilby and trenchcoat

> He will will ask if you have the time. You must reply: 'sorry, my watch has stopped'

> Place the envelope on the bench and walk away

> Then eat the briefcase



Tom

I have re-tried this several times with several different Ports, and I cannot make a stain that appears red once dried. So far all of my attempts have faded toward brown or grey-brown when they dry.

I'm tempted to make my Port-seared Scallops recipe again soon, and I suspect that the reduction would make a better Port stain than Port itself. I'm willing to try if you'd like.

Glenn,
try using Pink Port for the stain, the lighter color initially may stay more red.

Please, it must be vintage port I couldn’t take the shame of anything else.

Would it photograph red when still wet?

Glenn E. wrote:I have re-tried this several times with several different Ports, and I cannot make a stain that appears red once dried. So far all of my attempts have faded toward brown or grey-brown when they dry.

I'm tempted to make my Port-seared Scallops recipe again soon, and I suspect that the reduction would make a better Port stain than Port itself. I'm willing to try if you'd like.

I have better luck with white table cloth and cocktail napkins actually.

Is this still holding us up?
I am drinking an LBV tonight, it is very nice Rozes LBV from 1994 acquired at an extraordinary price courtesy of g-man after recommendations from him and the rest of the forum. An extended decant was learned only due to forum member experience. Filtration will be performed with techniques taught on the forum, and it will be drunk in glasses acquired specifically for our tastings. I can't think of any glass of port I'll have had here that so benefited from the forum's involvement. Would a glass stain from it be OK? I will create some immediately if this is suitable.

jdaw1 wrote:Would it photograph red when still wet?

No. While still wet, the paper turns grey ("wet paper color") due to the moisture. In order to get any decent color at all you have to let it dry first.

The very first attempt I made using the dregs of a bottle is still the best result I've produced, and I suspect that is mostly because of the sediment.

SushiNorth wrote:Is this still holding us up?

Yes.

SushiNorth wrote:Rozes LBV from 1994

jdaw1 wrote:Requirements:

• Sender to promise never to reveal house/shipper, nor the exact year. An approximate vintage (e.g., ‟nineteen-seventy-something”) is fine, but the house must remain secret, and hence so must the exact year.

Glenn E. wrote:The very first attempt I made using the dregs of a bottle is still the best result I've produced, and I suspect that is mostly because of the sediment.

Dregs are fine with me. Any secret VP.

You are asking us to deliberately waste VP?

I don't have enough to waste on myself, let alone random pieces of paper...

jdaw1 wrote:Please, it must be vintage port I couldn’t take the shame of anything else.

Would it photograph red when still wet?

Pink Port is from a vintage, sort of

How about the port stain found on the inside of a used filter paper. That's very purple.

I'm hoping that it would be a part of a circle, as if made by the bottom of a glass.