Landscape, wildlife, and adventure photographers (among others) will often keep their most treasured locations and subjects secret. And while this might seem rude or selfish or mean, the tale of The Broccoli Tree in Sweden—told beautifully in a recent vlogbrothers video by best-selling author John Green—explains exactly why this practice might also be necessary.
The Broccoli Tree, for those who aren't familiar, is (or was) a tree in Huskvarna, Sweden that somehow became social media famous.
Photographing this tree became a passion project of photographer Patrik Svedberg, and over the course of 4+ years, the tree gained quite a following on Instagram. In fact, it kind of became Insta-famous so-to-speak, accruing over 31,000 followers to date.
But Insta-fame comes with consequences in this day and age. No matter how beautiful or inspiring, no matter how much joy something brings to the general populace, there will always be those people who get some deluded self-satisfaction out of destroying it.
This is what happened to The Broccoli Tree.
One day in September of 2017, Svedberg went to photograph his favorite tree, only to find that someone had sawed one of the tree's branches almost all the way through. It wasn't long before the whole tree had to be cut down.
You can hear the entire story in the video at the top of this post, although you might be surprised to find that Green's takeaway isn't that people should keep these locations a secret, or not share photos of them at all. In fact, he comes to a totally different, if somewhat melancholy, conclusion:
The truth is, if we hoard and hide what we love, we can still lose it. Only then, we're alone in the loss. You can't un-saw a tree, but you can't un-see one either. The Broccoli Tree is gone... but its beauty survives.
Calling it the brocolli tree shows how self-centered, lazy and ignorant some people are. It's not brocolli, and it looks like other trees. Learn the name of the species, people. Learn about your world. You are only temporary. In the scheme of things you are meaningless.
My guess is that the Broccoli Tree photographer cut down the tree himself so others cannot take more pictures of it. It would be the only way he can continue to be famous for the photos & continue to be the only one making money off of the already taken photos.
You may not be so far off... When the photographer was interviewed by Swedish Jonkopingposten, he was strongly emphasizing the efforts he has put on promoting and marketing himself. So much so that it stuck to me as the main point in the interview. Not photograpy. Not artistic vision. Not what he wanted to express. Marketing.
Leaves me wondering -- if your main goal is fame, you've certainly struck gold when the tree was harmed.
I am a skeptic, so take this with a grain of salt. That said, when we 10 years from now look back to 2018, media manipulation is certainly one of the issues that signify our time, and a thing we should be very much aware of. Especially when we browse sites that indiscriminately publish just about anything where a photo is mentioned, such as this one .
And we should never underestimate the power that addiction to /Likes/ and /Follows/ can have to a person, and the lengths some people will go to keep them coming.
A little perspective: - it is a willow, they grow like weed. I have in my life tried to get rid of a couple, and it is near impossible. It'll be back in no time. - After seeing the inspiring photos in this article (Thank You for that, DPR!) https://www.dpreview.com/comments/4991414426/documenting-life-on-the-margins-of-russian-society-with-an-iphone I have to express my initial expression: These photos are boring and cheezy (yes, i did check the Instagram - there is not one that stands out.) This kind of gimmick is an example of Really Bad Photography - shooting the same thing over and over, with nothing evolving, no vision -- A Really Boring photo does not grow better just because you post an equally boring variation of it a hundred times. Even technically they are just snapshots., This guy is just lazy and talentless, probably sending his crap to every site in the world to self-promote.
The article isn't about the quality of the photos, its about the ramifications of photographing something.
Something that I learned years ago in my documentation of blighted areas. Scrappers were trolling the internet looking for intact, but abandoned places.
Humanity, without stern democratic regulation to check greed, self-interest and selfish ambition, is a plague upon the natural world. Poachers, the lackluster response to rapidly increasing climate change, extinction of species and destruction of forests and jungles is ample proof. This world will be severely reduced long before the realization that there is no salvation on Mars or any other world.
I know a quiet place on a mountain top, with a gorgeous view. A few persons know about it, often we are not alone, sometimes we are. If I share it on social media, it might change for the worse. I don't think it has to be between sharing it and not sharing it. I took some friends to this place. Some of them I have lost touch with. The place remains. So yeah don't share it on social media with thousands of persons that you don't know, to get likes. If you want to share photos go ahead, but you don't need to disclose the location to everyone.
Instagram and the others social media are the perfect example of how far can go the humans beings in their stupid travel to the glory. What a sad future!
John Lennon's murder was the first time I witnessed this phenomenon - people who feel their only chance of doing something that will be "real" enough to get noticed, is by destroying something liked, loved, cherished.
After being obsessed with why they trimmed the whole tree down I went digging. According to the Swedish parks department, the tree was entirely trimmed near the base so that the Coppicing Process could start. The Broccoli tree is of the Willow species which has the ability to sprout new branches from the base. If you only cut one branch it will seldom happen but by cutting them all the tree sends an alert signal to the cut off sections to immediately start the sprouting process. So it may after all return but it will never look the same as it did before and maybe decades from now it may look more like a Broccoli Stalk and not a floret. However, after all of that growth, a new vandal may do a new awful deed. Maybe the new generations will take care of these natural wonders better than today's crop. If anything showing this video in schools and to your kids should be mandatory in their education.
Evidently you hate having a lower tax rate, record employment, and a growing economy, and would prefer a criminal who committed multiple felonies with classified information. You can always move to the socialist Utopia of Venezuela.
Has anyone considered the possibility that the perpetrator might actually love the location and did this because they got sick of the hoards of instagrammers turning up to spoil the tranquility? I'm being a bit facetious and don't condone this kind of action, but I do think that photographers posting on social media need to take some responsibility for what they do. The desire for fame and recognition, in conjunction with the potential to get it on a huge scale, poses a great threat to the places and things that these photographers profess to care about.
This reminds me of a similar experience I had myself. Near my home town there was a large, majestic beech tree on a slope, not quite alone but set apart from other trees in the background of the meadow. Five years ago or so I went to this tree once a week and usually shot from the same position with similar settings. In the end I got a time lapse of the tree over the course of a bit more than a year. I did not post these images publicly (I am not the type of person for this) but it was part of a well-perceived slide show I held among fellow photographers.
Nobody hurt that tree on purpose, but about one year later one of its four main branches broke down for natural reasons. They cut it and had to cut the oposite one too. A year later the third branch had to be removed. The rest of the tree is still standing but it's merely a shadow of its former self.
Had I not photographed it in its beauty then I would have missed the chance forever.
“...the social internet’s single most famous tree.”
Umm, no. A few specimens in Lake Wanaka, the Portland Japanese Garden, and on the rim of Crater Lake beg to differ. I’d personally never even heard of this tree before this video.
That tree at Lake Wanaka has to be the most overshot tree in the last 5 yrs. People actually take photo tours to go take a pic of it....so much for an original idea.
@photophile, there are plenty of other people expressing an opinion on the main issue; feel free to read theirs. I chose to avoid adding to the me-too chatter and happened to point out a highly and noticeably dubious claim the video made. It’s only Tuesday and you’re already this wound up? You’ll never make it to Friday!
You are absolutely right pdxtrojan - outside the Instagram-Broccoli Tree bubble nobody knew about it, not even that many locals in fact, but among it´s followers it was huge. And it was the tree with single most followers on Instagram and that´s what the refer to, mostly because it sounds good and in that single aspect is true :). Was true.
sceneIt - Sure, ideological in that the OP is apparently not a fan of "liberal democracy", as an ideology. My point is that I think the OP is using the term as a synonym for "western democracy", not for the kind of "liberals" that advocate for social justice and planned economies. I have only ever seen the term used in place of "western democracy", as in the wiki page I cited. If you can cite examples of where it is used as a term for leftist ideologies I may be persuaded otherwise.
@sceneIt @TomFid I think you two should work on your vocabulary before questioning someone's intelligence because you don't understand a phrase he used. I am not even a native English speaker yet I know what "liberal democracy" means.
I ran a search for "liberal democracy" on NYTimes.com and that phrase was used 4 times today, twice yesterday and 7 times on the 14th.
@mjtalas Thank you. I cannot believe people would misconstrue "liberal democracy". It is a very common phrase in discussions pertaining to political ideology and form of government.
I'm not questioning your use of the term. I just think you've trivialized your own point (whatever it was) by equating skateboarding with a system of government.
What glorious form of government do you imagine would have saved the tree?
@Peiasdf Your post and continued discussion on this empty point have painted you as a total and complete moron. I hope you can understand my english and meaning in this case. I'm assuming you can but I expect more foolishness from you regardless, afterall, you are a moron.
@TomFid I'd imagine a moderate representative or authoritarian government with strong tradition of property rights would prevent this kind of property damage. You know, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Switzerland. I wonder if you have ever been to the countries I listed.
@sceneIt Let's see, -your first reply you mistake liberal democracy for liberal and liberal for tree hugger (the correct term is environmentalist and environmentalist and liberal are not mutually inclusive).
-You dug your heels in in your second reply when mjtalas pointed out your misunderstanding.
-Your third reply just called me a moron without giving a reason.
Does your genealogy book only goes back one generation because your parents burn the old book when they married their sibling? Oh, and yes, I do understand you. People from outside the US aren't as dumb as you think of them.
Thanks, so: > According to the Swedish parks department, the tree was entirely trimmed near the base so that the Coppicing Process could start. The Broccoli tree is of the Willow species which has the ability to sprout new branches from the base.
Still doesn‘t make any sense. There have been 8 branches. You don‘t cut 7 more branches to regrow 8 rather than maintain 7 branches. Why not let mother nature take care? There must be more to the story.
Could just be some stupid young kids who weren't thinking. I recall getting an arrow stuck in a tree and cutting part of it off to get the arrow with my no so smart friend. It's a miracle we survived childhood.
Thanks for sharing this. It is a good parable for the times we live in. However it leaves some questions. Who actually cut it down? Why? Chain saws are noisy, even Swedish Huskavarna saws. So how was the act of cutting down the tree not observed?
Interesting point. Beauty is the subjective reaction of the person viewing it. Something created by man almost always has at least one person who considers it beautiful, but is a natural object, which is widely considered beautiful, still beautiful before anyone sees it?
I don't get the "it's just a tree" thing. I was raised with the idea that human should respect nature, being animals, plants, trees, etc. Trees are living creatures too. They born, raise and die. Some are strong, some are weak, some die from disease, some are big and beautiful, other are ugly and weird... just as we do, us "human" being. I don't see how this is not so important cuz it's just a tree. This "just a tree" actually participates to absorb CO2 so we don't all die, and refreshes our planet so we don't overheat. I thought it was just guenine sense and that all people knew that we have to protect trees and forests if we want a future. Any tree counts. Unfortunately 90% of people on this planet are just trash to themselves and so to others.
Unf***ing believable! But I have two questions: 1. Was the first sawing off an act of vandalism that somehow went completely unobserved? 2. Why oh WHY did the authorities (I presume it was the authorities) saw off the rest of the trunks ?
There are trees around the world that are hundreds of years old - which saw damage either through natural disaster, or war/vandalism. And although the damaged parts fell off - the rest of the tree still survived - for hundreds more years. So why did they saw off all the trunks ?
I'm even more perplexed that happened in Sweden! I spent over a year living in Scandinavia and the authorities there have a low tolerance to vandalism. Scandinavian district councils and governments are among the most eco-friendly on the planet. So can anyone shed any more light on this story?
Eco-friendly is a buzz word that helps assuage collective guilt over being anything but. Consumer cultures can’t be eco friendly. Those that scrape by, or that build upon the foundations of old structures with the same materials, or repair and recycle in the purest terms, are. Scandinavia is eco-friendly from a consumerist standpoint, that’s it.
There is a deep love for and respect of nature built into Norse cultures, but it far precedes and far far outstrips the reaches of consumer eco-friendliness.
As to the why? Why not? There are nasty people everywhere, no matter how consumer eco-friendly or not. Think about it: build a high building and you can be sure someone will wing suit off it. Others will climb it to take a dump from its zenith. It’s what some humans do. As to the act itself, who knows, maybe it was a government intervention, or ... trees are cut all the time and have been since the dawn of culture. Sometimes it sucks, but for the most part no one cares.
1) Yes 2) If you read the article you would have noticed the point that the only way to get that particular sort of tree to regenerate itself is to prune all the branches.
@yelldog: You're going to have to put me out of my misery - can you pinpoint or copy-paste the bit in the article that mentions regeneration? I may need to go to the opticians..
There are many beautiful and unique trees around the world, and this tree isn't particularly unique or overly interesting to photograph. Funny thing is, people like to be told what to do, what trends to follow, in this case what tree is in vogue to photograph, without even realizing it. Its very clear that social media is speeding up the deterioration of special places on this planet. It makes me sad to see nature as a whole, being destroyed by the senseless and destructive behaviour of an out of controle species.
"It makes me sad to see nature as a whole, being destroyed by the senseless and destructive behaviour of an out of controle species."
I agree about deer. If their population growth is unchecked they will consume all the edible resources where they live and then die back until those resources return. Truly the worst.
Hi stevevelvia50 - the funny thing is about this - despite me being "the photographer of the tree" - that you is absolutely right in everything you say. The tree was about nothing but any tree around until I started photographing it. What's not visualized here is the fact that it was everything AROUND the tree that was the thing, and that this happens basically everywhere. Small things in a micro world, but with the tree as a great fixed point where I could visualize it - the greatness in the small happenings. Sad to say this was it's strong side and what became it's weakest side. Of course in retrospect, I should have waited my 30 some years before published ANYTHING. My point was that one that you CANT rush a tree. Let time pass. But Instagram clearly speeded up fame and actions, and eventually, killed the tree.
Someone cut one branch of a tree in some godforsaken shole no one cares in the midlle of nowhere, and we are reading about it on the first page. If Yahoo went down because of their 'we publish as news anything found on the Internet' -journalism, DPR has lately been worse: Any attention seeker can send them a screenshot of their facebook page, and they'll put it on the First page!
Anyway, looking at Mr Patrick's rant above, I guess it was not his photos, or the social media that has annoyed someone to the point of action. people just do not like the kind of passive-aggressive holier-than-thou sentimentalism that is oozing out of his babbling. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if he'd done cut the tree himself to get this kind of attention. After all, how did this 'article' end up on DPReview?
A note on the "godforsaken shole ... in the middle of nowhere": it is kind of funny that you use that word for easily THE most religious area in all of Sweden which is also, incidentally, located on the longest and busiest highway in Scandinavia... You are right about the "no one cares" part though.
@Juksu: "no one cares" - please don't speak for me! I for one DO CARE and learned something I didn't know 10 minutes ago. THANK YOU dpreview for publishing something that isn't just another camera comparison...
My strongest guess why the article went herea was because vlogbrothers produced a video published a week ago with 300.000+ viewings that means clics to profit on and it contains 1) photography 2) somewhat fame 3) death 4) a solo tree - so it was as good as anything else around here. Otherwise you probably is very much right - someone just like you that cant just stand anybody else's words/babbling about what is beautiful without getting the creeps about it and just want to cut something down just to shut his pretentious mouth did this.
"Landscape, wildlife, and adventure photographers (among others) will often keep their most treasured locations and subjects secret."
I hate this about certain photographers. These are selfish pretentious people. They seek personal attention and guard the small "celebrity" they gain in online forums with stubborn resolve. What these shallow thinkers do not understand is that other photographers don't care about looking at their photograph. Photographers will trample the countryside looking for that location doing more damage to the local environment than if a precise route is provided.
The author actually comes to the right conclusion existential as it is which might whiz over the heads of those using photography for ego building.
The same thing - mindless vandalism - happens to perfectly obscure, unknown and unfamous trees with unfortunate regularity. I've experienced the loss of favourite but entirely unphotographed trees...
While it's natural to assume that the fame of the Broccoli Tree contributed to its fate, it's actually entirely possible that the vandal was entirely unaware of its significance and just looking for a tree - any tree - to inflict some damage upon.
In which case keeping its location secret would not have changed its fate except there would be far fewer people appreciating it while it lived and to fewer to mourn its loss.
It is also entirely possible it was destroyed by someone who was tired of all the people who were coming to see it and have their photo taken with it. "If I can't enjoy my view of the lake because of all those tourists, I'll make sure the tourists go away."
@AustinMN Agreed, there are various possible motives, including sheer cussedness. Without knowing who was responsible and what motivated them it's all speculation.
Still the general point being made in this piece is valid. Social media can give rise to peculiar fixations, some of which can have negative consequences.
The same has happened to countless other landmarks as they say... for example, the Joshua Trees out west. And the one in particular (can't remember where it is) but that was made famous after being known for some appearance in etierh a music video or movie (can't remember honestly) but it came to the point where people were destroying the tree by taking pieces of it, and eventually the NPS had to erect a fence around the tree to preserve it. That sort of stuff. Why can't people just learn to enjoy nature and leave it alone for others to enjoy?
Like I said, I don't pay much attention to bands that much. Yes, I do listen to music but I take preference more to types of music rather than specific bands.
Not in relation to the infamous song, but if you truly love something, it's best to let it go. But for the record, this had nothing to do with social media and everything to do with humanity being inherently evil.
I don't think there is a distinction between social media and and humanity being inherently evil, they're one in the same. Just what evil invented social media... yes it too was humanity!
You really see humanity as 'inherently evil'? I suggest humanity is nothing but humanity, which includes everything from truly wonderful to seriously nasty...
Romans 1:28 Furthermore, since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, He gave them up to a depraved mind, to do what should not be done.
Genesis 8:21 .... and the LORD said to Himself, "I will never again curse the ground on account of man, for the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth; and I will never again destroy every living thing, as I have done" (That was in the Flood. But the fire is waiting ).
Psalm 14:1 ...The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds; There is no one who does good.
Jeremiah 17: 9-10 9. “The human heart is the most deceitful of all things, and desperately wicked. Who really knows how bad it is? 10. But I, the LORD, search all hearts and examine secret motives. I give all people their due rewards, according to what their actions deserve.”
@kevin_r: The Bible, and the words it contains, maybe your 'truth' - but it's not a truth shared by everyone else. What irks me about your statement is the implication you 'know' what is right and you know what we're supposed to think. You, like myself and everyone else, actually know very little, and quoting words written down by people you do not know, doesn't change that!
humans are ripping off ressources out of the earth, contamination of the air and sea, and killing each other because of war about ressources, religion and power. Also humans are the cause for many animal species being extinct in the wild, and this will continue ever so....
animals are killing other kind of animals, but only for their own survival of a given species.
Whether humanity is inherently good or bad is a far deeper conversation, but without several years of sharing the tree on social media these a-holes wouldn't have known to harm it. I'm guessing they disliked how it was more popular than them and wanted to stop others from enjoying it.
@Kevin, Christianity is based on the idea that people are naughty because someone made them naught and the only way to be naughtiness not to count is if you pledge allegiance to the guy who made you naughty. So of course its main book is going to say that people are bad.
But since it also says you shouldn't eat shellfish or wearing clothes which are a mixed blend of fibers so it's not really a reliable source for what is good and bad.
@kevin_r And yet, "God loved us while we were yet sinners..." (Romans 5:8) One does not love an _inherently_ evil thing, and none of your quotes actually say that humans are *inehrently* evil.
@DarnGoodPhotos Christianity is not based on the idea that "people are naughty because someone made them naughty" but because we have freely turned away from the source of goodness. Likewise it's not a matter of pledging allegiance but of turning back.
Sure it is. Original sin says everyone is naughty, and God made people that way. There is no age limit placed on original sin, even a newborn baby that is incapable of turning away from anything has original sin because that's how it was made...by God.
The only thing God made us is the ability to have free choice, he did not make us bad, he gave us the choice to be bad or not. He also gave us the opportunity to turn away from our bad ways try to be the best we can be knowing full well that we are not perfect and will continue to sin. It is not by works or by being good that we can be saved, It is only by his grace. I'm not going to tell you what or who to believe thats up to you, just be careful to avoid misrepresenting Christianity. Thanks
@DarnGoodPhotos The doctrine of original sin states that (1) people were original in a state of original grace; (2) this state of original grace was lost by an original sin; and (2) the perpetuation of this deprivation is due to human nature, not by God. Indeed, the Catholic Church (where the phrase and formal doctrine originate) holds further that God preserved Mary from the effects of original sin, showing that God's intervention on the matter involves the ability to preserve one from it, as opposed to actively "making" a person that way.
this was caused by social media whose sick and childish persuit of fame importance specialness etc has convinced at least one moron that this act of biocide lends worth or meaning to an empty life
...or perhaps a local who felt that one tree among thousands was a small price to pay for a return to peace and solitude and an absence of gawkers. That's a motivation I might be able to get my head around. Until we know who vandalized it, we don't know who vandalized it.
Anyways, Instagram popularity ruins almost everything. Thankfully I live in a country that is large and inhospitable and most Instagram seekers are not that determined and generally bereft of imagination.
Tell everyone about your favorite fishing hole and pretty soon, no more fish. Use an app that shares where the great photo locations are, spoil the location.
south park generation loves to up the ante who can be the "bestest" (=worst) offender/vandalizer/disrespectful goon to outdo the other
the generation of creators of that kind of attitude, came from antics of their own youth but as grown adults, sought to outdo their "like-minded" peers
then soon after, they garnered a big following of younger generations, they soon prodded them to outdo them "one better" (=worse)
much like "jackass" generation that followed after and the "youtubers" that create vandal-click-bait content
"south park generation" makes as much sense as "slave trade generation", "death camp generation" or "Vietnam War generation" - every generation has its good and bad sides. That you are familiar with the bad ones of the "young ones" tells us more about you than them.
south park generation equated destruction with "funny" other generations you listed, did not however, the children of those generations that may have been jaded by their older parent generations experiences, but see nothing better having inherited nothing better, with nothing left (the lost generations of today) have been offered no direction, no hope, but to lash out
it may be you have no experience in raising next generation that has enough privilege or experience to surpass you with ease, or find they are fortunate to live in "boom times", or ... not.
if you are debt-free, and own a home or two (no mortgage), no inheritance from rich landowner ancestors, plus have a well paid job (and grown kids/grandkids already better success than you) ... then you are not the "younger generation" (nowhere close)
you have no destructive inclinations of the hopeless (going nowhere generation)
there are lots who are not in your situation who are too open to hooliganism
you could not fathom who i am except i particularize it out explicitly for you
my point is spot on about younger generation who squander whatever privileges they have or already had it squandered by the many generations before them
I don't think that being awful is a characteristic that's particularly unique with the younger generation. I get that people are angry but it does no one any good to generalize and to take it out on any one generation of people...
many here will misread what i say because they read in haste i made it quite clear, when refering to any particular generation, say "xyz" i make a point to draw multi-generational aspect of that generation
that is there are those who are older (parental & grandparental), more privileged (supposedly responsible) who ruled or had greater influence over a the "xyz" generation era and there are those who are younger (descendants/children), who are the beneficiaries of the older generation(s) of that particular "xyz" generation era
unfortunately, we now live in an era, where the loop/echo effect of mere youthful waywardness is no longer as predictable in any natural way
but instead, the next generation have been goaded by a misfit previous generation into a worse situation TODAY, of seemingly dead-end hopelessness
the future having already been bankrupt by previous generation(s) in power or having more influence
who here recognize they are the inbetween parental generation of the lost?
Again, whatever you say about it, it still seems like a gross generalization. Most of the younger folks that I know are actually really thoughtful people and actually more sensitive, responsible, decent than myself and my friends were at that age.
Besides, why label any of that "South Park" anything? That show is funny and I don't see anything in it that would inspire folks to cut up broccoli trees. With so many folks on the planet, there are always going to be a few that do awful stuff; think about how it was a public pastime in certain parts of the US to watch lynchings... and that of course was many years ago. There's always going to be some rotten people, so best to get over it and not blame some kind of younger generation for this unfortunate fact...
Yes... and some of the punks were destructive nihilist types, but many were really responsible, politically active decent folks. Then, just as now, it doesn't make too much sense to generalize...
Most young people I have come into contact with are very focused and hard working. They know that life is not going to be as easy as it used to be, unless you make the effort. I'm pretty certain every generation, ever, has moaned that the youngsters aren't as good as they were. Yet the world has generally got better over the years.
I think it goes much deeper than simply blaming the South Park generation. Semi-rant warning: Look at the behaviour of our governments, business and industry: violent and destructive thuggery seems to be the norm. We smash other countries into rubble; we brutalise the planet (all in the name of making a quick buck); total idiots are praised in the media for their all-round 'awesomeness'; me-me-me-and-me levels of selfishness is advertised as a great way to live one's life; empathy and consideration for others is perceived as weakness, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera... Getting to where we are now, is not, as Aaron801 pointed out, the fault of a single generation, it's on all of us.
And therein lies the enigma of being human. On one hand showcasing and appreciating the beauty in nature while on the other destroying it. People sure are puzzling.
Its beauty survives its death because its beauty was recorded.
The same is true for people, architecture, and other natural things. Long after they are gone people can look at photos, painting, and videos of them and still see the beauty because it was recorded at the time they were considered beautiful.
An aspect of the beauty survives. An illustration, an idea of its beauty but not its beauty. All the ways the tree looks, all the angles, in all the sunsets or cloudy skies. Or burning sun. That's gone.
What survives is a narrow slice of the beauty. Same with people.
Based on the number of times he photographed the tree, and by extension all the copycats who did as well, I would say many ways the tree looked survived. The same is true for models and celebrities compared to people who are much less frequently photographed.
But still not always as good as being able to experience it in person.
There's places that don't suffer damages but the extra publicity draws many more tourists, and the surrounding area is subsequently made filthier with litter and the traffic worsens to the annoyance of the locals.
I saw this article a few days ago. Yes, it's sad the tree was damaged/vandalized and further unfortunate the park decided the damage warranted the removal of the entire tree. Yet, I didn't see anything to definitively say the tree was intentionally vandalized because of its fame as 'The Broccoli Tree'. Yes, it's very plausible but nonetheless it is not a foregone conclusion that the tree was vandalized because of its popularity on social media.
Though I think the counter argument about its destruction not being related to its fame is weak. I see it from a different point, cut down that one limb and a week later another limb would have a deep cut in it and the vandalism continues until it reaches the current state.
The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.
Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. So far, it's a fun camera to shoot with – if a bit over the top.
The Canon EOS R is the first full frame mirrorless camera to use the new RF mount. We're well underway putting it through our range of standard tests – take a look at how it compares to the competition and our thoughts on using it so far.
The GFX 50R is a 50MP rangefinder-style mirrorless camera. It borrows heavily from the existing 50S model but in a smaller body and at a lower price. How does it differ?
The instant camera market is heating up, and with four formats and 15+ cameras to choose from, we felt it was high time to examine them all and pick our favorite.
Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at seven current models and chosen our favorites.
What's the best camera for a parent? The best cameras for shooting kids and family must have fast autofocus, good low-light image quality and great video. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for parents, and recommended the best.
What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.
The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.
After shaking up the Lightroom ecosystem with Lightroom CC last year, Adobe has released version 2.0 of the cloud-centric photo organizer and editor. We look at new features like People View, how far Lightroom CC has come in its first year, and where Lightroom is headed.
The weather and has most definitely taken a turn toward fall here, and our shooting opportunities have followed suit. We brought the Canon RF 35mm F1.8 along to a harvest festival of sorts and a few of our usual haunts.
Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf has signed House Bill 1346 into effect, which imposes a fine upwards of $300 to drone operators who invade the privacy or harm the physical wellbeing of citizens.
Sigma is a company in flux, but CEO Kazuto Yamaki is undaunted by the upcoming prospect of developing lenses for eight lens mounts. The challenge will be keeping the company's identity along the way.
If you've been meaning to convert all of your old photos, video, and audio to digital formats, but simply lack the time or willpower to get through it all, a new service from Kodak will help you get the job done.
Almost all new cameras include impressive video features, but for the best results you'll often need an off-camera recorder. Chris and Jordan take a look at the brand new Ninja V from Atomos, and explain why it might just be one of the most useful tools you can add to your camera.
Sick of using your plain ol' keyboard to edit your photos in Lightroom and Photoshop? TourBox is hoping to expedite your post-production workflow using a clever combination of dials, buttons, and knobs.
We sat down with the Google Pixel camera team to learn about key new camera features on the Pixel 3 and Pixel 3 XL, and an explanation of the sophisticated software advancements that power them.
Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. So far, it's a fun camera to shoot with – if a bit over the top.
The FAA has issued a warning to drone pilots in anticipation of disaster response following Hurricane Michael, noting that fines for interfering with emergency operations can exceed $20,000.
At a time when manufacturers are adding triple and even quad-cameras to their flagship smartphones, Google is sticking with one main camera. But given the sophistication of the company's computational efforts, we think it's the right approach for now.
The Pixel 3 and Pixel 3 XL offer a second front-facing camera and a host of improved computational features such as digital zoom based on super-resolution capture, better depth mapping and a fill-light effect for low light portraits.
Comments