[asdev]

if you cooked a meal with a ton of butter or oil, it would not be able to detect the quantity. it could possibly undercount by hundreds of calories, making it useless. if you're not serious about the counting then it could be fine

[Bnjoroge]

that's what I mentioned above, read again

[nake89]

Not to be pedantic. But being able to be 100s of calories off per meal is not 80-90% there.

I'd be surprised if it came close to the accurate amount of calories even 50% of the time. If by there you are talking about accuracy.

How would it know how many calories my curry has from a photo? It cannot. It could be full of oil or have none.

How can it know how big the bowl of food is? It cannot.

It cannot know the actual fiber content of any baked good just by looking at it.

The promotional photo gives 7/10 nutritional score of pancakes with syrup? Why? because it has a couple of blueberries sprinkled on top? I'm sorry, but this does not seem like a useful app.

The promotional text on their site says: "It is consistently 90% accurate when predicting nutritional value of food" They might as well say 100%. They get to cherry pick the food they photo. It would be impossible to be 90% accurate if they actually included similar looking foods with different fat contents. Mash potatoes made with butter, without butter. Mash potatoes in a big bowl vs small bowl.

The site just reeks scam.