Is taking a picture of a single tree a requirement of being a photographer (Page 3): Also good to turn over a new leaf once in awhile.

mflowe Loc: Port Deposit, MD

alphonso49uk wrote:

Its good to branch out every now and again

Also good to turn over a new leaf once in awhile.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

grandpaw wrote:

I follow and watch a lot of photography videos and I am wondering a what point does taking a photo of an individual tree become a requirement. A lot of photographers seem to do this. It really hasn't appealed to me, is there something I am missing? They seem to go on and on about the composition and how beautiful the scene of the single tree is. I don't get it! What am I missing???

The only requirement for being a photographer is: capturing an image.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

quixdraw wrote:

Can only speak for myself, but occasionally a particular tree has such a presence in its surroundings that it generates interest worthy of photo.

ELNikkor

Not a requirement at all! You can be an outstanding photographer for 80 years and never take a photo of a tree (or trees). There is a special composition and artistic form to many trees, so those with an eye for it want to capture that form. I myself have many such photos, (including that famous Lone Cypress on the California coast!)

leftj Loc: Texas

grandpaw wrote:

I follow and watch a lot of photography videos and I am wondering a what point does taking a photo of an individual tree become a requirement. A lot of photographers seem to do this. It really hasn't appealed to me, is there something I am missing? They seem to go on and on about the composition and how beautiful the scene of the single tree is. I don't get it! What am I missing???

You're right. You don't get it. It's not a requirement. It is an image to take an image of a individual tree, or an individual mountain, or an individual dog, or an individual cat, or an individual building, or an individual person. Do I need to go on?

ecobin Loc: Paoli, PA

It becomes addictive - try it.

Zooman 1

First of all knock off the insulting comments not helpful and inappropriate IMHO! Trees are fun to photograph. This winter during all of the shut downs I gave myself a project of photographing the dead and fallen trees at the nearby Funks Grove, IL. I enjoyed it, the challenge of finding those that appealed to me was part of the experience. To me it shows not shallowness, but willingness to explore a subject and find some satisfaction in what you create. I personally have photographed things as small as newly hatched mantis to Denali. I still and hope I will always enjoy photographing tree(s).

anotherview Loc: California

It's just another subject among many.

grandpaw wrote:

I follow and watch a lot of photography videos and I am wondering a what point does taking a photo of an individual tree become a requirement. A lot of photographers seem to do this. It really hasn't appealed to me, is there something I am missing? They seem to go on and on about the composition and how beautiful the scene of the single tree is. I don't get it! What am I missing???

waymond Loc: Pflugerville, Texas

Kilmer's classic.
Stay well.

leftj Loc: Texas

Zooman 1 wrote:

First of all knock off the insulting comments not ... (show quote)

I haven't seen any insulting comments. Guess my computer filters them out.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Trees will always be there for you even though you feel like you're alone.

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

Kmgw9v wrote:

“I think that I shall never see,
A poem as lovely as a tree”.

I think that I shall never see
A billboard lovely as a tree
And if a billboard doesn't fall
I'll never see a tree at all...

Ogden Nash

LouieP Loc: Sebring/Avon Park, FL area

I don’t know why it is appealing, and never gave much thought to it. But many years ago, when I first got a digital camera, and not thinking about anything in particular about ‘photography’, I spotted one of those single trees. It just appealed to me for some reason. It is one of my earliest keepers.

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

Rongnongno wrote:

It is something you are missing, actually several ... (show quote)

Winslowe

grandpaw wrote:

I follow and watch a lot of photography videos and I am wondering a what point does taking a photo of an individual tree become a requirement. A lot of photographers seem to do this. It really hasn't appealed to me, is there something I am missing? They seem to go on and on about the composition and how beautiful the scene of the single tree is. I don't get it! What am I missing???

Rather than fretting over what others do, try thinking for yourself.