Green Tasmania

When one speaks of South Pacific islands, there are a variety of images that immediately come to mind. However, none of those images are likely to match what Tasmania looks like. Despite being an island in the South Pacific, it is in a mild but far from tropical climate zone, and as such, looks more like northern England than South Pacific.

Tasmania is well watered, which makes it ideal for both agriculture and hydroelectric energy. It also makes it immensely green. Everywhere you look, it’s green. The island is actually the continuation of the mainland’s Great Dividing Range, so it is quite mountainous. It is also heaven for lovers of wildlife.

I think the photo below gets across a little of the intensity of the greenness of Tasmania. It is not the olive green of South Australia and Victoria. It is the deep green more familiar to those of us from the northern hemisphere.

Green Tasmania

Green Tasmania


Filed under Australia, Book, Geography, Travel

9 responses to “Green Tasmania

  1. whisperinggums

    Lovely place – and your photo gorgeously reflect its colours. While I tend to prefer the hotter drier climes and so moved to Canberra in early adulthood, my brother loves something more temperate so he moved to Tasmania in 1984. We can’t prise him out – which is OK really because it is a beautiful place to visit and I now have an excuse (if I ever needed it) to visit there! And, it is a nice respite when the hotter drier climes get a bit too hot even for me!

    • It’s always hard to figure where I’d be happier if I were actually working, rather than traveling in Australia. As a traveler, it is the pretty much the Outback that owns my heart, the Red Centre probably taking top honors. I love the rainforests, too. But man, get me out somewhere with red rocks and no rain, and I’m overjoyed. To quote my book (sorry, I’m a writer, so I do occasionally quote myself), standing on a hill about an hour out of Alice Springs, “I wondered again, as I have wondered before, why this place moves me so. I am drawn to the remoteness, to the vigor, the fierceness, and the unfettered innocence of this land, and its spirit whispers to my spirit, and its song sings in my veins.”

      I loved Tasmania for its physical beauty, for the wildlife (I wanted to take one of the Bennett’s wallabies home with me), the seafood, and the history, but it never sang to me.

  2. Never been to Tassie but it’s on the plan. Unlike South America or Africa, it’s actually achievable in the short term.

    I found a book by Randolph Stow called Tourmaline some time ago, and it gave voice to how I (as an outsider/foreigner/immigrant) felt about the vast red centre. It was until then, an ineffable feeling. And even then, it wasn’t as much what he said that encapsulated it, it was a lot of what he’d left out.

    I read that book twice at a go, and I find myself coming back to the images it left me at the strangest moments.

    Not that any of this has to do with Tasmania! Is this the end of this particular journey in Australia?

    And of course, on my favourite subject, how many rolls of film have you collected since you started?

    • No—Tasmania isn’t the end of this particular journey, just a move to a new state. I landed in Tassie just a little more than three months into my six-month trek. So there’s still heaps to go. And that’s just on this trip. I hope to record my three subsequent trips to Oz, as well.

      And how many rolls of film? Hundreds. I’ve calculated that I’ve got more than 40,000 slides, of which more than 7,500 are of Australia. Hard to imagine how many I would have if I actually did this for a living! But now they’ve stopped making Kodachrome, so I’m going to have to figure out what to do next. Just switch to Fuji, or break down and go digital. (Not that I’ll ever find a digital camera that can replace my Nikon FM2.) Sigh.

  3. That’s 40,000 since I started shooting seriously, not on one trip! When you said “collected,” I thought you meant “accumulated.” I take all my film with me, as it can be hard to find on the road (plus, if you’re buying 100 rolls at a time, it’s a lot cheaper to buy in bulk). So I don’t collect film as I travel, I just carry and shoot.

    I usually plan about 20 rolls of 36-shot film per week while I’m on the road, though I’ll usually toss in an extra ten for the trip (kind of like the one spoonful of tea for the pot), just to be safe. For my big Australia trip, I just kept mailing the rolls home as I traveled—which worked nicely, as it freed up space for souvenirs.

    Sorry for the confusion.

    • Haha, no I didn’t really think that you’d shot 40,000 in Australia. You mentioned it was more like 7500?

      (Though that’s still a heckuvalot of Kodachrome!)

      It looks like we haven’t seen a fraction of what you’ve got. If you ever set up a web gallery/archive, I’d love to know about it!

      I’m also looking forward to hearing about your new digital camera whenever you get one. Hehehe. AiS lenses meter wonderfully on some of those bodies, promise!

      • Yeah — it’s a heap of film. As for switching to digital, I have two primary concerns. One is batteries. With my FM2, the only thing run by the one, tiny battery was the light meter. The battery was smaller than the tip of my little finger, so I could carry a few spares, but I only needed to change it maybe two or three times a year. Now, powering the digital is not a big deal in civilization, but when I was camping in Mongolia, for example, we went for days without seeing an electrical outlet, and just how many of those large lithium batteries can one carry? It seems to me, when I’ve been traveling of late, that everyone is running out of juice every other day and having to load new batteries — and that seems like it would be both costlier and heavier than just toting film.

        Other concern is work. With a good Nikon and Kodachrome ASA 64, all I was responsible for was knowing the camera and framing the shot. I didn’t have to process anything, or color correct, or adjust. The Kodachrome captured an immense amount of detail and color, I gave Kodak the film, they returned the slides with all that color and detail. My friends who are professional photographers spend more time on the computer than they do in the field, shooting. I realize that, if that’s your passion, that’s cool. But I want to just get as good a shot as possible without having to be my own laboratory. So we’ll see. Fuji still makes Velvia ASA 50. So maybe I can hold out just a little longer.

  4. Batteries are definitely something a pain if you’re outside urban infrastructure I will admit. The only way is to buy a bunch of them and carry them all with you…. and hope for the best 😛

    Consider a Fuji DSLR body – they take Nikon lenses (they’re based on the same Nikon bodies, but Fuji make their own sensor I think) but the color, straight out of camera, is amazing. I’m one of those strange people who loves post processing, but even with that, all you really need to do to a properly exposed digital photo, is bump the contrast. I don’t exaggerate on that one. It makes an incredible amount of difference.

    I guess I’m just saying, don’t discount digital. It is a different experience but not necessarily a bad one. As a Nikon fan, as long as the company’s making cameras, it can’t be that bad! Haha

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s