nice landscape and nice plants but IMHO without a clear close-up of the foliage it's going to be rather hard to put a name on them---the general shape is common to a number of different plants and you MIGHT have anything from some kind of ornamental pear OR a maple of some sort OR a sweetgum/liquidambar OR even an aspen (populous tremula "Swedish upright" for example) ---OR something else completely different!!!! good luck.

Agree with George. Most likely pears. The two in the background have the typical shape and branching. The two in the foreground look like they have been pruned a bit on the sides. 2nd best guess would be an upright red maple.

Bradley, you're going to hear it here anyway, so might as well be from me: Those do look to be ornamental pears and these have proven to be among the very worst offenders in terms of birds eating their tiny inedible (to us) fruits and then spreading this species far and wide out in the landscape. To wit, an invasive plant, and not some lightweight deal, but a real slow-motion disaster in the making. They also tend to break apart easily in ice or snow loads, as well as wind loads. Other than that, great plants!!@^#@E@!~

+oM

would tend to agree that the picture looks rather artificial and more of an artist's rendering of an "ideal" landscape---a kind of a photo-shopped "stage set" rather than an actual photograph of real plants (the planting spaces indeed look really small for the trees to grow in) but the picture quality (on my screen at least) is not very good so difficult to really know for sure what I'm looking at imaginary or otherwise.

Since house is apparently not geometrically symmetric formal garden does not go with it. And once any of the pears starts to break up the entire effect will be lost - planting schemes that depend on strict uniformity are always at risk of failure due to how plants vary.

bradley hartley, what exactly is it about those trees that makes you think you need them?

Impossible to tell for certain at this distance but the trees could also be a columnar European hornbeam like 'Frans Fontaine', an excellent tree with a very narrow profile for a tight space. And the openings in the paved surface do not look any smaller than those available for sidewalk trees.....which usually manage to do quite well considering the restricted environment. Any number of rather urban gardens could present a confined layout similar to that depicted. With proper attention, the plants survive very well.

Also the symmetrical/non-symmetrical residence versus formal or informal garden is entirely a matter of personal design choice. There are no design rules that state that a symmetrically designed/proportioned structure must have a formal garden layout or an asymmetrical design requires an informal garden layout. Each site will dictate layout according to site conditions, the architectural footprint and the all-important personal choice factor. In the above photo, the enclosed courtyard lends itself very well to a formal layout. And there is nothing in the photo to suggest the architectural footprint is not symmetrical - the side from where the photo is taken could very well match the the other exactly.

Here is the area where I plan to lay the trees. I appreciate the help and everyone's detailed opinions. You are all very helpful people.

That looks to be the "Capital" Pear. Pyrus Calleryana "Capital"

As you can see, I need privacy trees. The trees I presented at top are desired for tight girth as I'd prefer to have 2 trees planted for better privacy. Planning about 5-6 feet from railing. I'm looking at Pear trees, but they are a bid wider than I would prefer in this constrained area. Any help or recommendations are appreciated.

Area looks a little tight for two trees, even very narrow columnar ones. And I'd encourage you to rethink the pear selection. Not sure where you are located but callery pears are considered invasive across much of the eastern half of the country, in addition to the fact that they are not very structurally sound and are prone to a lot of breakage with winds and snow.

There are a fair number of narrowish, columnar trees that could work in this location but best suggestions would come if we knew exactly where you are located and the dimensions of the planting area.

Barring any additional info, I'm still going with my suggestion of Frans Fontaine hornbeams.

Also the symmetrical/non-symmetrical residence versus formal or informal garden is entirely a matter of personal design choice

As with all use of physical materials to create visual effects there are shared psychological responses that do determine what is "working" or is "good design". When a building produces one type of visual pattern and the garden in front of it another than a sense of disharmony is generated.

If we want to instead argue that personal taste is the only relevant psychological factor in operation then we can start saying that painting a row house brilliant magenta with orange trim is sensible and appealing, that crazy paving is just the thing for a walkway leading up to mansion with a formal facade, and so on.

They are Bradford pears. Google image leads to the designer's website and this project. http://www.jackmerlodesign.com/#/Projects/1

as mentioned already, some idea of the climate (USDA zone????) might be helpful for making more accurate suggestions about trees adaptable to the area. OTOH, there are potentially hardy evergreen trees that might act as attractive screens ALL YEAR as opposed to just late spring thru mid fall with the deciduous species. for example "pathfinder" and "skyrocket" junipers has the narrow upright look apparently desired as well as forms of thuja occidentalis and perhaps even "jolly green giant" thuja if a large tall upright screen is desired.. that said, IMHO 5-6' of clearance is really not much space for anything but the smallest tree or large shrub (a viburnum of some sort?) AT MATURITY (unless you plan to do lots of shearing and pruning to restrain branching as even most upright/fastigate trees spread out over time) so it's likely that something in the smaller size like the junipers, a thuja occidentalis cultivar, or perhaps a form of hybrid yew (taxus x media) or even a sheared hemlock (tsuga Canadensis) hedge planting??? BTW, these ideas good, bad, or indifferent are based on the GUESS that you are in USDA 5-7 or thereabouts----warmer climates will increase your choises---for better or worse, LOL.

We are in Northeast Ohio, Heavy snow belt region, typically get up to 2 ft at one snowfall if the low pressure, cold air and early winter conditions are present. Lake Effect. Ohio, USA

so guessing USDA garden climate zone 5 or 6---FWIW, think most of my suggestions would be hardy there. that said, with apparently limited space have you just considered building a fence to act as a screen (lattice work types would allow some light in)?

Could go with a columnar oak like Regal Prince, Kindred Spirit Streetspire, Skinny Genes, Beacon (very nice newer Swamp White Oak selection that will grow 2' a year), etc... all are fairly easy to grow and will tolerate most sites.

Dakota Pinnacle Birch would be a great choice as well and would grow rapidly and give year round appeal and attract birds. Also Apollo Maple would be an upright variety with good fall color.

Lots of conifers- you could also do Shawnee Brave Bald Cypress or Prairie Sentinel Pond Cypress for a different look.

Other flowering ones are First Blush Cherry or Marilee Crabapple- First Blush Cherry is a new upright variety but probably won't be available until next year.

Don't do the pear- too many other non-invasive choices are now available. Also, if you find a selection that is a little wider than what you would like why not just go with one tree rather than two?

Good luck!
Bruce

I think that placing dense, upright trees right on top of a raised deck like that is not the best design choice. The deck is kind of tight, and you may want to let it "breathe" a little if possible to avoid a claustrophobic vibe. You don't want to step up to a railing on a balcony like that and be met with dense foliage right in your face.

If you have the space to site the tree at least 10-12' from the deck, you will have the option of planting a less formal looking tree than the ones discussed above, like a small-ish shade tree or a large "patio" tree. Regardless, anything you can do to move your privacy tree(s) out farther away from the deck than your planned 5' will give you better results long term. Just an opinion.

You are going to find that opinions are like certain body parts...everyone has one, everyone thinks theirs smells great, and that everyone else's stinks.

Except, of course, by coincidence, mine. It's the only one you need.

You're not so much looking for a specific tree, as a shape.

One person will say you need one tree, another will say you need four, someone else will chime in and say only plant in odd numbers, and then someone will ask if a doorway has three sides...and what happens if you have space for six trees, need six to cover the sightlines, but are hung up on the odd number guideline? We're in the middle of an existential crisis...over rules of thumb that just don't matter. Where is the alcohol when you need it?

Who says he need to move out from the deck? How do we know what space constraints may exist on the other side? Or what other uses for yard space a person might have? Or what effort a person who has a tall deck to stand on might be willing to put into trimming?

My personal recommendation...I'd stay away from trees that have flowers and fruit in areas of high traffic. There are a number of crabapples that would stay narrower than 6-8', but my personal preference, is to avoid the multiple seasons of debris fall (petal, flower fuzz, june drop, fall fruit, leaves all the time) that come with them. Of course, if prevailing winds blow away from the deck, I may reconsider said opinion in this circumstance.

So what kind of maintenance budget do you have? Are you interested in something that can be maintained at 2' wide, if you trim it a couple times of year? Any tree CAN be trimmed to whatever size you want...some are more equipped to deal with it. Frans Fontaine Hornbeam is at the top of that list. Slender Silhouette Sweetgum. there are a number of different maples that follow close behind. The columnar maples are more likely to bush out a little more. Given time, anything and everything will want to get wider. Just like people, the waistlines expand with age.

What zone are you in? That's crucial in knowing what trees can survive in your area. The tree pictured might not survive where you are. An evergreen might be better for privacy. Eastern Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana) and arborvitae (Thuja occidentalis) are columnar evergreens. Not columnar, but I like American Holly (Ilex opaca). It takes well to pruning, I understand.

To sum up what others are saying, there are many trees that have that shape. I like the 'Frans Fontaine' suggestion. Ornamental pears are the obvious choice, but DO NOT USE THEM because they are invasive and tend to disintegrate...one will die pretty soon and mess up the symmetrical look. The designer of the above either didn't know trees or was assuming the owner would purchase full grown trees to replace the trees as they died. (Commercial properties often do this). Not sure how closely you are trying to emulate the look the architect was going for, but be aware if you buy pears or try to squeeze trees into such a small space with the paving the trees likely won't last long and you will periodically have to replace them. That is a gorgeous but somewhat transient look.

Habit of trees shown may be a bit erect for 'Bradford', with one of the multiple other Callery pears on the market probably more likely.

Quite possibly. The person who planted them thought they were Bradfords but they could well have been wrong, being a landscape designer and not a gardener.

The term 'Bradford pear' is often used as a general catchall name for any variety of Pyrus calleryana in much the same manner as "kleenex" is used for any facial tissue or "scotch tape" is used for any sort of clear adhesive tape. Since the designer is located in Australia, this could be a common practice there, supported in part by the use of generic common names to refer to all plants used in the design. The writer (or whoever prepared the descriptive blurb, perhaps the designer) does not appear to be necessarily intending the comments for serious gardeners.