Neither of the optical sorters I worked with could come near 2 tons in 12 minutes, I don’t know if a ‘normal’ sized destemmer could keep up with that at any consistency.
The folks at Kosta Browne told us that it was originally designed (in Switzerland) for potato chips.
Like.
OK I’ll take the off-topic terroir bait.
Does being selective increase or decrease the degree to which you capture “what the vineyard provides?” The answer depends on how selective you are, ranging from leaving in all the MOG to using only those berries you deem perfect. That is a human decision, whether implemented via human or robot sorters. As are all of the other farming decisions that come prior to sorting the grapes. Which in turn means there is very little meaning to the concept of terroir built into the land/climate and no such thing as respecting the terroir. It’s really all about respecting the traditions established by the farmers that preceded you.
Thanks. Two tons in 12 minutes sounded like a lot to me, but I’m not ITB and have no basis for reference. Sounds like they come in different capacities. Or the article just got the numbers wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time.
What happens if you’re in a labor crunch. ie everyone rushing to pick at the same time and the labor you depend on to sort is not available?
If you ever visit Hall Rutherford, you will see what unlimited resources can get you.
I should clarify, I thought about this more and while the optical sorter might be able to do 2 tons in 12 minutes, that speed would likely be limited by the capabilities of the other equipment on the crush line. I’m sure equipment that fast exists but isn’t likely being used by any wineries that have fans here. But I’m occasionally wrong 
Well, that is one way to look at it 
I really don’t think there’s a simple answer here. I just like to get the discussion going. There is no one who can tell me what percentage of 'imperfect ’ material, big grapes or other stuff, leads to a negative impact on the finished wine. In fact, one may make the argument that by having some amounts of this in, you will end up with a more complex finished product
Go at it, folks!
Again, if these machines are set with photos to determine what passes through, then there would be no need to only allow ‘perfect’ grapes. From an economic perspective, I would think only using the best of the best would not make sense.
I roast coffee (for myself, not commercially). There’s a term ‘eye cupping’, which refers to lowering the cup quality/complexity by sorting the beans (green, preroasting) down to only the visually perfect beans (note, eye cupping has a couple of different meanings/references). Otoh, sorting is an important way of improving cup quality (done at the ‘specialty coffee’ level mostly)…so it’s a bit tricky, and requires knowledge of the farm/village to do well.
Folks in Bordeaux have been using optical sorters for quite a while and discovered the same thing…that only using the perfect berries make a less interesting wine. Various domaines are experimenting with adding in various small percentages of stems to replace the stems & stem pieces that used to get added by the destemmer (I assume they endlessly tweek the parameters of what berries do/don’t get through as well, of course).
And…very interesting video Roy!
A few us just spent a week in Bordeaux and saw a lot of the big names using Optical Sorters…
it doesn’t replace hand sorting, it’s often added as a 3rd sorting (after hand sorting pre and post de-stemming). It can really help on unripe years as it can be programmed to control size, color, weight.
Interestingly Ch. Margaux said they tried it and didn’t like it and are moving back to hand sort only…
but many big names have these… and i think it costs around 150-200K dollars each? (120-150 gbp if i remember right).
Optical sorting has been around for a very long time, I’m surprised that there is his kind of discussion around this concept. As with any technology that improves quality and efficiency, it would stand to reason that there is little downside for the consumer and the job losses are an expected part of mechanization.
I don’t hear people lamenting the use of tractors because of all of the farriers that are now out of work. It seems like an unusual argument to me.
There is some controvesy surrounding the hand harvested versus machine harvested plus optically sorted grapes that I would like to hear thoughts on. There is an article below that could spark some debate.
The issue with mechanical harvesting is the grapes get crushed more compared to hand harvesting, making sorting (and mold handling issues) more difficult or less effective. Mechanical harvesting has gotten much better, not surprisingly.
Also, mechanical harvesting has certain requirements on the placement of fruit on the vine…which can limit the trellis/canopy strategy somewhat. And it’s limited on hillside vineyards
As one of the tiniest label-producing Cabernet vineyards out there, I can say that assembling a team to get you through picking, sorting, and crushing…it can be a challenge!
I select an ideal pick date, get the winery ready to receive the fruit, then get a commitment from a VM crew to pick and truck. If the winery is backed up at the crush pad, or the VM company has other vineyards to pick, then it become a series of negotiation. Then I kidnap friends, neighbors, relatives, customers…anyone. We sort at the bins, which means that we have 9 guys picking and dumping their pans into the 1/2 ton bins. As they are back picking more rows, I and my “quality control team” are working quickly to remove green leaves, brown leaves, and any clusters which don’t make the grade. If in doubt we sample a berry from the cluster. Not good flavor in line with what we are picking? To the ground it goes.
Exactly. When I saw those machines picking for Sterling a few years back, it was pretty low-tech. I believe it was picked and crushed as one event - right in the vineyard. No sorting there! The next year was machine harvested, but hauled off to the winery for crush. This year they pulled the entire 14 acre vineyard and are in the process of replanting.
And yes, the type of trellising and placement of the clusters on the vine add complexity to the mechanical harvest issue.
As mechanical harvesters get more efficient with less damage to fruit and optical sorting to remove bad and/or damaged fruit, does it really hold true that hand harvesting results in higher quality wine? Other than impractical vineyards (hillsides, old vines, etc) and the limitations on canopy/trellising, do you think that the only difference in the end product is a percentage of good fruit loss (due to damage by the harvester) or do you think the end product would be lesser?
I personally think this evolution is coming and more high quality producers will be mechanically harvesting because of obvious financial benefits due to labor costs but also exact picking dates could me much easier to achieve. As Merrill alluded to, if you have to wait on a rental work force, you may have to compromise you picking date. Whereas mechanical harvesting could complete the pick in a fraction of the time and one could likely narrow their pick date down to a single night/morning.
Obviously not everyone will make that choice and for some it would be impractical or impossible. For those who will have the choice, I think more and more will make the switch even among very high end producers.
In a year like this, optical sorting is a life saver. With the heat we have had, there is going to be sunburn, raisining, etc. The entire cluster may not be affected, maybe just the shoulder or one side. The growers aren’t going to want to put that entire cluster on the ground, the vineyard management companies don’t have the staff to do that kind of work right now and as a winery if you paid for it, you want to get what you can from it (50-80% of cluster may be unaffected). Hand sorting (by cluster) will likely end up throwing the entire cluster (if the interns are still awake and paying attention), berry sorting will likely miss a number of them (again: interns) - optical sorting is the best option (the settings & parameters you can set/program would blow your mind).
For my tiny ranch, it is definitely a hand pick/hand sort. My place (and my business) is not representative of the norm in any way.
As I left the winery after the final sort and crush, a new intern at the winery asked me which fruit was mine. I pointed to it. He said, “But there weren’t any leaves in those bins.” Correct.
Michael S. Monie wrote:
larry schaffer wrote:
Here’s a big philosophical question though: how ‘representative of what the vineyard provides’ do you end up capturing when you use something like an optical sorter? We want to talk about terroir . . .
Would a hot dog be better if it included whole beaks and claws?
Hot dogs don’t include beaks and claws?? That’s where the flavor is!
Larry,
Your question was first posed when the Bordeaux chateaux started to make second and third labels so the first label always tasted great…no more deals on off vintage Pichon Lalande, in other words. Certainly this changed the product in the bottle from the days when the pickers were hired three months in advance and did everything in a week or two. My first visit to Romanee Conti was in 1977. They were hand sorting grapes back then and nobody complained about a lack of terroir. I do remember visiting a producer with Zelma Long and others back then. He said he thought anything under 10 per cent rot was great and I could see Zelma bristle.
A lot of wineries, Kistler is one, go through the vineyards a day or two before harvest and drop all the bad fruit.
I am not surprised that optical sorters were not originally developed for the wine biz. Flash detente comes from the jam business.