You need to edit your description. As for specular highlights...well....sometimes when we're viewing a scene things are blown out anyway, right? In a case like this the sunshine on the water would create pure white, our eye just takes it all in with the rest of the scene and doesn't really dwell on it. Am I right? That can be the problem with a photograph...you're concentrating a person's focus on a small area, so then they look for 'faults', etc. So here you're talking about the reflected light being blown out....while if I were stood on the beach looking at this scene I wouldn't even consider it.
Not sure my post means anything btw....I just realised I went into waffle mode.

In fact...that was definitely waffle mode. Please delete/ignore*

*your choice

mark: thanks, I've fixed the description. And I know what you mean, this isn't a fault, it's just something I spend a lot of time trying to avoid so am not sure what to make of it in this shot.

I´d like it more, if there would be something in the foreground....something else than plain water. Secondly, I don´t read the technical data you send. An American photographer, Bert Stern, from the sixties has said (correct me if I´m wrong) : "The most important thing is what you see in the finder".
I learned it after 20 years of photographing and have done it the during the next 20 years.
And finally, some of your photos talk to me , others don´t. Anyway I´m checking your blog every day.

I think the specular highlights work well in this photo. It feels very natural.

Wonderful image. I am fascinated by this area and how people are surprised by the tide coming in. Would love to see this one day.

I think this works so well *because* of the specular highlights. They let the viewer know that the sun is up there just out of shot, and they definitely lead the eye up into the picture towards the figures in the distance.

I generally dislike digital overexposure, too (and have ruinued a great many photos that way...), but I’ve been experimenting with it recently and have been quite surprised: both at how tolerable blown-out areas are in the right circumstances, and how much of an everyday scene is often ‘blown-out’ to even the eye’s wide dynamic range.

Anyway, in this case, I think it’s definitely positive—or at least evocative—in a way that an under-exposed shot wouldn’t be. :)

I like this a lot in that you can see the silhouettes of the figures on their trek, where they came from, but not where they are headed. Makes me think of moses in a way. Also, the small dof is definately suitable for this shot.

Hi David,

The photograph is, overall, a pleasing photograph to view, especially in its color tone (a very good choice in color) and because of the gradient towards darker tones/exposure to the bottom right of the image, where the spectral light appears particularly natural.

Specular light can be fully integral to an image and noticed only willfully and with the intent to do so. If anything is bothering you about this image I think it would be that the specular light is almost fully integral but not entirely. Even if I didn't know what blown highlights were, I think my eyes would be somewhat distracted by the spectral light - beginning about the middle of the image and upward, as the fading DOF draws one's eyes directly toward the spectral light itself, especially on the left side.

In that respect, I think a smaller aperture and deeper DOF would've benefited the image.

There's no reason to be shy of specular reflections, especially when they are integral to the image and don't dominate.

Two things about this I find a little unsettling though; the horizon appears to slope slightly (I don't think it actually does, but to me it appears to), and the whole picture seems to be slightly unbalanced tonally. Maybe it is those specular reflections after all...

Not much to add to the comments above, but thought you might be interested in gauging the degree of agreement there. Even the human eye does not have sufficient dynamic range to prevent wave-tips from being "blown out" in the normal view of sunlight on water. Try it: stare right at it, try to get your eyes to adjust far enough: other parts of the scene may darken, but nothing will bring detail to those points of light. So processing a photo until those highlights disappeared would make the image look odd and artificial -- itself not necessarily a bad thing, but reason if reason were needed to leave the highlights in. Like Arthur, I have always exposed (digital negs especially) for the highlights, but have recently begun actively trying to learn how to control blowout, having found that I rather like it (and other "artefacts" of restricted dynamic range) in the right shot.

Finally, I think I disagree with Dennis: what draws my eye back to the figures is not the dof/loss of focus but the gradient of light/tone, and I find the sudden contrast between the dark figures and the increasingly scattered, diffuse highlights to be very pleasing. Having the figures out of focus is a nice touch: it adds a certain mystery, even ominousness (is that even a word?).

So, fwiw, I really like this one.

Lovely image. Great tone.

Personally, this is my favourite of yours of recent days. The simple beauty of the water, the colour tones, and the focus. It's incredibly soothing to look at.

Very sharp. It feels like I am in the water myself. The water almost flows into my livingroom... Well anyway, I like this one!

As others have already commented intelligently and sensitively on the photograph, I'm tempted to wade in (pun intended) on the title itself. "We Stand and Wait" reminds me of John Milton's line, "They also serve who only stand and wait," which in turn reminds me of the old pun story which ends with "They also surf who only sand and wade." You've...ahem...covered the waterfront with this one, David! A nice one, from image to title.

I have really been enjoying these beach shots.

And the new site design is top-notch!

You've provided some much needed inspiration!

Sure, we should avoid overblown highlights - it's a rule. But for every rule, there are exceptions and, in art particularly, it is the exception that sometimes makes the greatest impressions. A simple view on your dilemma in this shot: if you shot the sun directly and wanted it to look natural, you'd have to blow it out (as if it's that easy to not). The blown highlights here are little mirrors of the sun. How can it be a natural looking shot if they're not blown?

mmmm...Specular Highlights...*drool*.

Not inspired by the shot, David. But the blown out tips actually work well coupled with DOF to bring the view to the scene.

Maybe try a few shots which take advantage of the highlights but with a change in scenery? I'd like to see some experimentation.

Nice shot. It seems like they are walking on water.

I think the water looks kinda fake... like when they used putty or something when filming thunderbirds. It all looks sort of minature and plastic, the people too look unreal. Not sure if that makes the photo better or worse.
I think tee specular highlights are an issue because in real life your brain blanks them out, but of course you can see then when if you focus on them.. in print your brain just doesn't do the same jiggery pokery. I think maybe this photo would look better in print, rather than the old screen with crazy gamma I'm using at the moment.

Not my favourite picture of yours, I have to say.

Looks a little strange, the people look like little alien figures in the distance.

I like the detail in the foreground but I prefered the previous two shots - I'm a sucker for that 'wow' factor!

I like the photo. I heard the end of an interview on Radio 5 Live with you on Friday - just happened to get into the car to hear the last 30 seconds. Was this to do with Blackpool's cultural city status?

I'm not too sure about this image. I'm sure that I am in a minority but I find the water to be a little too overbearing. The figures are a little marginalised.

Love the perspective - looks almost minature.

Overall, I like the photo. However, my eyes keep trying to bring the figures in the background into focus, so, I think I would like it better if they were in focus. I really like the detail in the foreground.

Bit of an odd one this - I quite like the out of focus figures, sky, toning and composition overall, but don't really feel that comfortable with the focus being right at the front with only waves there. I was thinking it might work a bit better if the focus was between us and the figures (dare I say about a third of the way up the image), but there'd still be a problem of nothing much to land on. I don't think it works as well as the earlier two. Having lurked for yonks, this is my first comment!

My second comment - (didn't think I'd be that quick). I forgot to add... specular highlights are different from overexposing and in my view are perfectly acceptable. They can add a touch of dynamism and vibrancy to an image.

or it could be titled, "walking on water." brilliant work here.

It's a very fine picture. You are really passionate about photography! And the image of the waving sea is making you thinking at the summer holiday!

I love the texture of the water in the foreground, and I think it's perfect that you've focussed on it. The highlights make the image and the texture imo; I think it would look rather flat without them.

Vraiment une très belle photo que voilà, j'aimerais pouvoir en faire autant ....

Thanks everyone.

beautiful
reminds me of the sigur rós saeglopur video