In fact, a single photograph may require a great deal of time and careful planning to execute (perhaps with a series of concept sketches, lighting plans, and so on to work out the compositional and logistical details).
For a photo, there might have been effort, but it was taken with a camera. I don't take art using a camera. I take photos.
Ie: I go into Minecraft and build something. That's art. vs. I go into Minecraft and take a photo of something that someone else made. That's a screenshot.
Stop motion animation can't be art either because it is just a chain of photos of objects someone else made.
At this point it sounds like you are simply asserting, without providing an argument, that your position is correct. But I am unclear on what exactly your claim is: is it that (1) no photography is art or that (2) the photographs that you yourself take, as a rule, tend not to be art?
I am indeed asserting, without proof, of my opinion, as I believe we all should. This is my criteria for what is and isn't art: https://w0nder.herokuapp.com/posts/9fjM1tOJO7MWX4fYw3AU2Q==/...