It's definitely not as easy as it looks.
I think my best tree pic I've ever taken was the post oak that I keep showing everybody that I took last october just casually walking by with my bulky old 2001-ish camera.

Maybe Julie from treegrowersdiary.com has some pointers. She is afterall a pro photographer.

Most difficult thing I find is trying to get a whole tree in a pic - the sky then burns out the top edge, and also affects the exposure meter so most of the tree ends up just as a black silhouette.

Resin

My favorite shots are looking up into the limbs and lower trunk from beneath.

For trunks - horizontal shots - a person or object is nice to include to understand the dimension.

Even with photos of coast redwoods - the best pics tend to show trunks or a view up the trunk.

I have to agree. Looking up into the canopy from below is a shot you don't often see. I've taken some nice pics looking up into tulip poplars and beeches. At least I think they're nice even though they aren't pro quality.

What do you think of the shots I posted in the Gallery? What i really looking for is info on book writing and publishing-anyone done it?

Resin, you could get a ND grad filter to keep the top from burning out. Oops, sorry, graduated neutral density filter.

Or, if shooting digital use a tripod and take 2 (or more) shots at graduated exposures from the exact same spot and superimpose one over another in a photo program.

Or, take pix when the sky is getting dark at a low exposure, or when it's really cloudy.

I agree something should be included in tree pix to show scale.

"graduated neutral density filter"

Nice idea, but it wouldn't work with the slender crown of most of the trees (conifers!) I try to take photos of

"Or, if shooting digital use a tripod and take 2 (or more) shots at graduated exposures from the exact same spot and superimpose one over another in a photo program"

Again, nice idea, but I don't think my camera (or my photo editing programmes, either) can cope with that! Also - how would it cope with the outer fringe of the tree's crown? At a fast exposure, the crown would be black with good sky, but slow doen the exposure, and the edge gets burnt out before it turns green.

Resin

Greenlarry, the project you have outlined has the virtue of being small and local, but even small, local books can be hard to do well, and hard to sell. I would suggest you test it by offering local tree profiles to a newspaper, as a monthly feature under your byline. You could even offer a few gratis, unless you can show the editor you need to impress some clips of other recent published works of yours.
This would give you a chance to test your skills and to judge whether there's a market for what you'd like to do. It would also give you quick feedback.

Giboosi,a ND filter is a useful addition to a photog.s kit but they don't work that well in this situation,something has to give. Best way is either to shoot up into the tree as many have suggested. I love that technique but it can be overdone. I like the sound of the multi exposure but unfortunately a lot of the time I can't take a tripod with me or get a level footing. Most of my shots are hand held,or supported with a monopod. Looking thru Mr Packenhams books I see that even he has the same problem and gets round it by trying to exclude the sky if possible(fantastic big trunk shots) or try to shoot on a blue sky day and bang on a polarizer,the most important and useful filter a photog. can ever own!

I'll have to try the polariser, that might be better, thanks!

Resin

Resin, I don't know if you've ever used one,they're normally used to remove reflections but also if you have a blue sky and the sun's in the right position rotating it males the sky go quite dark,boosting contrast.

Yep, got the 'lenses' from a pair of old polarising sunglasses, so know what they do. Whether they'll be any good as filters I don't know, they're rather scratched. Next time there's a sunny day (next year?) I'll give it an experiment.

Resin

I just remembered there might be a problem when using the old type of polarizers. You see there are 2 types,the old linear type and the modern circular arrangement(linear and circular refer to how the polarizing particles are arranged on the sheets) Basically when modern camera systems were introduced in the late 80s and 90s its was found that the old type may interfere with the modern metering and focusing systems. The solution was a circular arrangement which is how all new polarizers are sold. Not sure if there's too much to worry about-I have an old one and it seems to work fine on my canon;not tried it on my digi tho. And I would imagine that lenses from sunglases would be the old,cheaper to produce linear type.