Is a blown out section ever acceptable or does it ever 'work'? C&C please

[StringThing]

Hi all, I went out Saturday afternoon to try to take advantage of what I knew would be a great setting sun and some golden light. The light reflecting off the rails stood out right away and I wanted to capture it. The problem I was having is that the angle of the sun was always blowing out that area of the photo. In hindsight I'm wondering if a cir-pol filter might have helped. I also know I should have played with my e/v values, so what you see here is a cropped photo underexposed in PSE.

My question is: does a section of blown out photo ever work, or is it always a blatant no-no?
Oh and C&C on the photo itself. Thanks!

Nikon D3100 - RAW
Aperture Priority
f/16, 1/30, ISO 200, 18-55 VR lens, Tripod

Mer Blue Bog walkway by stringthing68, on Flickr

 

[Kerbouchard]

It's never a blatant 'no-no'. Often, reflections, specular highlights, and the sun will be overexposed. This is rarely a problem.

The only time it is a problem is when areas that you want to have detail are overexposed.

For your shot, I like it, and I don't think the Sun being a bit on the bright side is a problem.

 

[biggoron]

i like the shot. but im not a pro

 

[clanthar]

There are basically two types of highlights in a photo: diffuse and specular/light-source. Specular highlights are, as Kerbouchard noted, things like reflections off chrome, glass etc. Street lights in a twilight shot would be an example of a light source highlight. It's expected for specular/light-source highlights to be blown, but hopefully they will be small, and flare will be controlled.

Diffuse highlights have texture and/or color. Clouds, white tee shirts, blue skies are diffuse highlights. Blowing a diffuse highlight is just wrong. Every rule in this world has exceptions of course, except that one.

Joe

 

[StringThing]

Thanks very much for the comments and technical descriptions.