Perfect timing of waves cresting.
LET ME EXPLAIN WHY THIS IS COOL:
With cameras, like eyes, the more light the better to see something. Less, the less you can see.
Now, to be able to take a photo of something moving fast, you either need to follow it at the same speed and/or have A LOT of light so that nothing ends up blurry.
This photo was taken at—I think—sunset. There is LITTLE light. Meaning HOW THE HECKA HOO WERE YOU ABLE TO TAKE A PERFECTLY DETAILED PHOTO OF A FAST MOVING FORMLESS OBJECT IN DIM LIGHT???
Those are two ways to get a crisp shot, yes, but you forgot a third.
To capture fast-moving things like that, in low lighting… you’d just need a giant lens, and set it to a giant aperture, with a fast shutter speed.
(Basically how open the ‘pupil’ of the camera is. Bigger aperture means more light can come in, meaning a better picture in low ambient light. Too much light, and the photo becomes mostly white.. Shutter speed is how fast the camera opens and shuts its ‘eye’ to capture an image. Fast shutter speed means super detailed ‘frozen in time’ shot, slower speed means it’s open longer, so you see those light trails or motion blurs).
Or, with a large aperture and a long shutter speed, you can watch the stars turn in the sky.
Expensive as hell, but larger lenses can refract a ton of light inward, so you can still have beautiful pictures at lower lighting.
People mistakenly think that it’s impossible to get clear photos like those waves in lower lighting, because they’re used to using lower-quality lenses on their cameras and smartphones.
With a big enough lens (and I mean fuckin’ huge) you could take crystal clear photos at high speeds by the light of the full moon.
Or, y’know, lantern light.