Is this art?

Can a simple photograph of a simple tree be art? I asked 20 people if they thought this was an art form. The results were interesting. Out of 20 people 40% believed that this was not art, higher than I had expected. Josh Page from Canterbury said "I just think there is nothing arty about it, it's a photo anyone could take it" Josh himself is an artist of music, so I asked him, being an artist yourself... through your music, do you not think that with enough practice anyone could do what you do? He replied, "Yes I do think with enough practice anyone could do what I do, but no artist will ever be the same, every person will have different ideas, influences, methods etc, and its very much a life of luck as well as talent, there is a difference between being able to play a musical instrument and a real artist, that's really what defines it at the end of the day" Josh Page plays Bass guitar for Orangespine.
60% of the people I asked said that the photograph was art, James harding said "It's an artistic representation of a tree, not just an image of a tree captured against its literal background. it doesn't confer just the mundane form of a tree, but rather the viewer can infer from the image a sense of beauty. In this way, the photographer has personified the tree - that's what art is all about."
Art is interpreted differently by every individual, this simple photograph of a tree is deffiantly art to me because wes4130 the photographer used a lot of camera and editing skills to get the exact image they were looking for, this photograph is art to the artist I guess it doesnt matter if no one else sees the art in it. What do you think?