Very nice!
Who is this idiot who trivialized such a great photograph with such a banal comment???
Oh, wait... never mind.
Now seriously, this is one of the best fine art photographs to grace this forum in a while. It is a pity it generated only two responses so far, both rather banal (sorry, Eric).
Let me elaborate it then:
I am usually rather weary of various tricks, canned solutions, "art" filters, etc, either applied at the point of capture or in post processing. This image has several of these, and yet... it works. Goes to prove it is the end result that matters.
The chosen composition (square) is perfect. Horizon smack dab in the middle works only in square. Central placement of subjects works only in square. And yet, in a nod to classical rule-of-thirds composition, there is a gradual darkening in the lower third.
This image can be printed 8"x 8" (Michael Kenna's favorite) or 8' x 8' and it will still work. The toning is fabulous. Greenish enough to avoid being decoratively "pretty," yet not sickish green. Leaning toward sepia, yet avoiding the cliché. The subject can be seen as pure abstract, or as even as a documentary (if you come close enough). The three dots in the middle can be seen as birds, surfers, or distant sails, depending on the viewing distance and enlargement. Enough ambiguity to satisfy even Russ' definition of street shot.
Then there is a simplicity of execution: huge negative space, a few discernible lines, three dots. And yet, with such minimalist approach, the photographer managed to convey the sense of movement and perspective, rushing into a vast nothingness (there you go, there is even a hidden philosophical aspect).
In the end, just one word: bravo!