One of the key issues in the aesthetics of nature as a main branch of philosophical aesthetics is the “nature” of aesthetic experience, or rather appreciation, of nature. In this context, some models are suggested that made this appreciation subject to some conditions from descriptive or prescriptive point of views. In this paper, after an overview of the main suggested models, one of them, the art-centered or artwork-based model, is discussed, a model which makes appreciating aesthetic aspects of nature similar to appreciating arts, especially the visual arts and most notably painting. The question is to what extent this model can do justice to the aesthetic appreciation of nature qua nature. In response, it will be shown that at least for five important reasons, this model is not a sufficient one, and it can not capture all the characteristics of the aesthetic appreciation of nature. At the same time, referring to the exchanges between art and nature, it is argued that emphasizing on the inadequacy of the artcentered model does not mean that it is unable to enrich our aesthetic experience of nature in some important ways and to illuminate some of its dimensions without which it would remain dark.