David you took the words out of my mouth, I wrote this (below) yesterday but in the end I decided to only post about his amazing reticence with the camera.
I sort of have a compositional problem with the photo, it looks like quite a ‘down’ angle vantage point the photo was taken from allowing for the distance involved, if the object was half a mile away as he estimated he must have been rather high up to get that angle one would think, but he said he was standing on the stern of the boat. It must have been a reasonably large boat to provide that amount of height at the stern but unfortunately I didn’t see any description of the vessel so that aspect remains a bit of a mystery. Then there is the question of the wind dapples on the water (it’s more of a cross chop effect, presumably the bow wave ripples left over from the vessel’s just completed passage are the horizontal ripple contribution) which don’t appear to diminish much in size from the bottom of the frame right across the distance to the object, wouldn’t they even at telephoto focal length diminish in size and frequency a little more than that over half a mile? Anyway so far the whole thing looks a little strange to my sense of perspective, but it really depends on how big the object actually was and how far away it really was and how high above the water the photographer was in fact also a most interesting detail would be what focal length was used as well. I guess if the height above the water was known and also the focal length that was used one could estimate how far away the object was and roughly how big it was too.
Another query I have is this guy spent how long looking for the ‘Nessie?’ and finally one day spent 5 minutes watching a presumably large object moving in Loch Ness and only took one photo of it…?
I might as well have another query or two, like where was the head? If it’s an air breathing ‘Plesiosaur’ type wouldn’t it need to breathe at some point, instead it apparently it just submerged and disappeared without bothering to breathe. If it was an ‘Ichthyosaur’ type it also would have to breathe but the nostril might be more whale like in that case, in any case there is the question of what those large animals would live on in Loch Ness? I thought I saw a study that found there was really not much of a large fish population living in the waters of the loch because the vast majority of it was oxygen poor despite being such an expanse of deep water that ordinarily would be expected to support a population of large fish.