Reading colour correctly: An assessment routine instead of instinct

Colour is the first quality attribute customers see. It therefore quickly becomes a proxy for freshness, ageing and enjoyment. Professionally, that shortcut is risky: purple meat may bloom normally after opening, a brown area may result from oxidation, and a persistently red appearance does not automatically prove that a product is flawless. A robust assessment begins with the system. Which muscle is involved? How long and at what temperature was it aged? Which packaging material and vacuum level were used? Is the seal intact, is there gas formation or unusual purge? Only then should colour be observed, both before and after a defined period of air exposure. The second step is sensory assessment. Aroma, surface condition and texture are described separately before being combined into an overall judgement. Words such as “strange” or “unattractive” offer little help. Specific descriptors are more useful: sour, sulphurous, metallic, sticky, slimy, dry, even or patchy. This makes observations recordable and comparable between employees. The third step is the decision level. Not every colour deviation means spoilage, but evidence of damaged packaging, interrupted refrigeration or abnormal aroma must not be dismissed through a visual explanation. Food safety takes precedence over saleability. Where operational limits, microbiological data or legal guidance are missing, sensory assessment cannot replace specialist analysis. Good quality work therefore separates three questions: Is the product safe? Does it meet the agreed standard? Is it attractive for the intended presentation? That distinction prevents colour from being either overvalued or ignored.