I like b of those three. I'm not sure why people have a problem of using clear symbols in top down maps simply because they are profiles. If realism was, for some reason, a concern you'd never see the trees at all. I hate to break it to people but satellite photographs aren't that interesting until all the details get cleared up in the form of a map and you can see what you are looking at. I used to have this big Alberta province resource atlas and they did stuff like B a lot. It works fine. Where it gets troubling is if there is too much interference with other detail, which is why that atlas had like a hundred pages.