Videos of espresso extractions

[HB]

Our kitchen is not conducive to video. The lighting it too low, and there's the non-stop bustle of family activity. Below is a test video at the maximum zoom of my digital camera (Canon Powershot S230).


Note my wife and baby in the reflection. Mercifully I removed the audio track to save you from the background noise.

[HB]

The previous video was a tight ristretto and I let it run long. The one below is a more regularly proportioned double espresso; final volume was ~1.75 ounces.

[lee]

Interesting. Are these considered good pulls? How would an "ideal" pull differ?

Thanks,

Lee

[HB]

I think they are good, but I wouldn't claim they are the stuff that dreams are made of. The second one looks like it could be showing signs of "barberpole" channeling, though it could be the lighting too. The initial even beading, consistent speed of the pour, volume, and coloring were all within spec. The blend was Intelligentsia's Kid O's Organic Espresso, which I use in addition to their Black Cat blend for evaluation extractions.

I'll leave it to Jim or Barry to assign a grade (he says nervously...).

[HB]

I sometimes chide those who post pages of gorgeous bottomless portafilter shots because (a) after seeing a few dozen, it's lost its impact, (b) there's little educational value, just the "oh, cool" factor, and (c) frequently they choose the prettiest part of the extraction - the middle - where early problems with unevenness may have "healed."

John Weiss (RapidCoffee) has been advocating his needle-stirring technique, dubbed the WDT. In talking with him offline, I suggested he demonstrate the value by showing the first few seconds of the extraction where problems with unevenness (e.g., "donut" extraction) are most evident, or the last few seconds that show the sites where blonding begins, which further indicate if there's modest channeling (or not).

I don't have fancy video equipment and getting quality time in our kitchen isn't easy. But I wanted to see what could be done on short notice, so I made the above videos and posted them to video.google.com. Recently they've added the ability to inline the video, as you see above. The board supports this with user-friendly BBcode tags (e.g., [gvideo]link[/gvideo] would inline it). Another thought was to update the Naked Extraction article with videos instead of stills. It would then be the equivalent of "America's Worst Home Videos - HB Edition."

Critiques about the particular extractions above are welcome. Or if you have videos you would like to contribute to the discussion and need help uploading, let me know via e-mail / private message.

[k7qz]

Thanks for taking the time to do this Dan!

I agree- I think it would be fun to see a shot of the WDT. Another issue that seems to come up here repeatedly (and elsewhere) is the Stockfleth's move. Perhaps Stockfleth's could be the subject of a forthcoming "featurette".

One of the things that I "learned" from watching your video was timing. From the point you "threw the switch" at 00:02 to the time the first drop of great looking espresso fell at 00:10, 8 seconds had elapsed. I don't know why but somehow I had it in my mind that if it took more than 4 or 5 seconds for that first drop that I must have the grind set too fine.

Hmmm, after "watching you" I think I'll experiment a little more!

[skyryders90]

One of the things that I "learned" from watching your video was timing. From the point you "threw the switch" at 00:02 to the time the first drop of great looking espresso fell at 00:10, 8 seconds had elapsed. I don't know why but somehow I had it in my mind that if it took more than 4 or 5 seconds for that first drop that I must have the grind set too fine.

I noticed this as well. On my Bric, from the time I flip the lever until the first drop fall is usually in the 4-5 second range. What's interesting is that this holds true regardless of whether I'm pulling a ristretto with ~1 - 1.25oz volume, or a normal double with ~1.75 - 2.0oz volume, so it's probably not a function of the grind.

Is this something to do with the group?

[cannonfodder]

I thought you had a S1. That is obviously an E61, and that looks like a Macap in the background. From what I see of the gauge, I would say a Vetrano, Quick Mill and I don't suppose that would be one of the new stepless Macap's. Is Chris sending you toys to try out again?

On a more technical note, by removing the audio track your file size would have been reduced. Do you know how much savings you got? I would imagine the audio bit rate is substantially smaller from a photo cam in video mode than a stereo DV cam. I did a video once using it but the file was enormous.

[Grant]

I thought you had a S1. That is obviously an E61, and that looks like a Macap in the background. From what I see of the gauge, I would say a Vetrano, Quick Mill and I don't suppose that would be one of the new stepless Macap's. Is Chris sending you toys to try out again?

On a more technical note, by removing the audio track your file size would have been reduced. Do you know how much savings you got? I would imagine the audio bit rate is substantially smaller from a photo cam in video mode than a stereo DV cam. I did a video once using it but the file was enormous.

We convert video conferences to streaming video for archiving, and from what we have seen (based on the audio format we are using), it works out mathematically approximate to the audio format/bandwidth used. Example...we use an audio codec (g.722) that uses 64Kb/s for full duplex stereo - but it only uses this as a maximum...it could be less (almost zero) in times of silence. If we use 50% for the approximate bandwidth used (32 Kbps) for a 30 second video...we end up storing (30 x 32Kbps) = 960Kb of data - or roughly 120 KB.

Bottom line, when you create the video...the audio track can be imported manipulated, converted to make it quite efficient - almost nonexistent in comparison to the video.

Grant

[HB]

One of the things that I "learned" from watching your video was timing. From the point you "threw the switch" at 00:02 to the time the first drop of great looking espresso fell at 00:10, 8 seconds had elapsed. I don't know why but somehow I had it in my mind that if it took more than 4 or 5 seconds for that first drop that I must have the grind set too fine.

As Steve noted, the group makes a difference. I made the video below as part of diagnosing uneven extractions on the Elektra A3:


And some commentary:

Distribution woes. Bed has heavy density on the left side as compared to the right and in the center as compared to around the edges. I'd guess you'd taste uneven extraction and you could probably get a lot more volume out of the coffee with better distribution.

Back to my point, notice how quickly it beads, barely three seconds. The E61 expansion chamber takes some time to fill and that produces the gentler pressure ramp up I mentioned in the Vetrano bench review:


Anita (vibratory) and Vetrano (rotary)

The vertical gridlines represent one second increments. The test was done with a thermofilter and it already had water in it from a previous measurement, and yet there's still a good 4-5 seconds to full pressurization. Generally I expect a bottomless portafilter to bead on an E61 in 6-8 seconds. I wonder if the 4-5 seconds you are seeing are due to water taking a shortcut around the sides, i.e., some side channeling. Or maybe the gicleur diameter is larger on the Bricoletta, though I doubt it.

[HB]

From what I see of the gauge, I would say a Vetrano, Quick Mill and I don't suppose that would be one of the new stepless Macap's. Is Chris sending you toys to try out again?

Aren't you the observant one! Yes, there's extra equipment coming for EspressoFest, including the Macap M4 doserless, Quickmill Anita, and Fiorenzato Colombina that have already arrived. As time allows, I'll do short "behind the scenes" writeups in the coming weeks.

[cannonfodder]

Aren't you the observant one!

A good student always spends more time observing the teacher and less time talking.

I wish I could go to the EspressoFest. I know how much I learned talking and watching Barry and Ed (homeroaster.com) for one day. Getting a chance to just sit in a corner to watch and listen to the experts is wonderfully educating.

[onemoreshot]

I just put up a new video of a pretty good one ounce shot, not a perfect extraction but it tasted really good. My two year old son has some pretty funny commentary on it. Hope you enjoy!


http://shaundoreenevankeegan.blogspot.com/

[HB]

That pour held together surprisingly well for a 36 second extraction. Your son thought it tasted good, what did you think?

I pay close attention to the first few seconds and you can see the center is weighted, producing an initial "donut extraction" that's later enveloped. The coloring reminded me of the Yemen from Intelligentsia I've been pulling lately. Oh man, while I haven't managed a perfectly balanced espresso with it, I'm hooked on the off-the-charts Belgian chocolate, the sumptuous crema, and cocoa powder finish. And for you bottomless portafilter fans, its striping is Barista magazine centerfold material. Beauty shots are so easy, it feels like cheating.

[onemoreshot]

You caught me on that one Dan, this shot does show a more resistive center and it is something I am working on this week based on a few video's I have taken. Getting right under the naked pf with the digicam has shown me much more compared to torquing my neck over to try and see the full pf. Reviewing the shot a few times on a big monitor lets me get really critical of my technique. I have seen some good improvements working with video and this shot proves it in the cup.

You might notice that the bar pressure is generally around 11 when I am pulling, I have really come to like a very tight grind, updosed to approx 18-19 grams and run anywhere from 35-55 seconds. Jon Rosenthal's treatise on ristretto's created a monster and it is really hard to go back to 9 bars at 15 grams and 28 seconds. The shot was good enough that I could sense the various offerings from the blend of Harrar, El Salvador and Java. Of course it would have been that much better without that center resistance.

The next video I am going to load up shows a different resistance point but in my opinion looks fantastic dripping out with that gloppy honey drip. Google is just verifying the video now, look forward to your critique.

[JonR10]

...the Yemen from Intelligentsia I've been pulling lately. Oh man, while I haven't managed a perfectly balanced espresso with it, I'm hooked on the off-the-charts Belgian chocolate, the sumptuous crema, and cocoa powder finish. And for you bottomless portafilter fans, its striping is Barista magazine centerfold material. Beauty shots are so easy, it feels like cheating.

Hmmm - my secret is finally getting out!!


Here's a decent pour made using the WDT:

[HB]

Approx 18-19 grams of Harrar, tight grind, 11 bar, just under one ounce volume. Result - everything you would expect out of a Harrar. It was, very, nice! You can see a small initial resistance point during the pull, but I didn't notice its effect in the cup. Perhaps I like resistance points.

Let me know what you think.

Looks very similar to your previous video, i.e., long extraction time, low volume, center-weighted. My running joke on Friday espresso labs is that we'll allow 42 seconds before declaring a shot "choked"; if it manages 3/4 ounces by that point, it's declared fissile material, only drinkable by Mr. Triple-Power Ristretto himself, Mike Walsh. Your shot was two seconds past our unofficial redline.

Seriously though, I would expect such a long, low-volume extraction to exhibit harsh / overbearing characteristics. It might be less "punchy" at a faster flow rate, but more mellow / flavorful. To further quibble, I noted the center flow is "puckering" because of the higher density / low flow. Nonetheless it's clear that your technique is solid; the next step is exploring the extraction space.

[onemoreshot]

The referred article was fantastic, I read it when it first came out and just enjoyed reading it again.

Dan, I'm such a tool, but you are going to love this one. Center weighed, I have been fighting it for the last week based on the video work I have been doing and studying. I have been going to the extent of loading the outer edge of the basket with additional grind through an elaborate method of distribution. Immense amounts of effort put into precision tamp and placement of pf, etc, etc. Always getting various degrees of some kind of center resistance. Shot quality at times good (when I went back to square one) or getting worse (when I started to devise new ways of distribution). This had gone on for too long, granted some of the shots were soooo much better than commercially available but enough "offness" to be irritating.

In frustration I decided to do a deep clean and scrub down everything this afternoon. Ta dah, the culprit in my opinion and the source of a good head-shaking session and a sense of relief simultaneously. By pulling off the screen and rubber seal on the Brewtus II, it was instantly a snap into focus on the screen's inside design. The wire screen was reinforced on the inside by a web of reinforcing metal, pretty common, but the center point in the screen has a big circle of metal that obscures the wire mesh by a guess of 1.5 - 2 centimeters. A big bloody built-in blockage (alliteration intentional).

SO, I am off to a local shop to get a screen like some I have used in the past. That should solve the center resistance. Now as for the fissile nature, I do love the gloppy shots - can't wait to see some extra-even gloppiness with a new screen.

[HB]

The wire screen was reinforced on the inside by a web of reinforcing metal, pretty common, but the center point in the screen has a big circle of metal that obscures the wire mesh by a guess of 1.5 - 2 centimeters. A big bloody built-in blockage (alliteration intentional).

Some E61 screens have a "dot" welded to the outside / middle, some only have a center area devoid of holes like the one shown below. I'm skeptical that it's the source of the restricted flow near the center. I assume you've tried the WDT?


The shame! After a few weeks without chemical backflush...

[onemoreshot]

That looks like my screen for sure. I haven't tried the WDT, I am stubbornly resisting, an almost blind stubbornness believing I can resolve my center resistance by other means. I am going to try a different screen as I can't see the screen pictured in your post as being neutral during a shot.

Is this the screen you use on a regular basis?