Lol I thought I recognise these mountains, this has to be Machapuchhare in the background.

The front one isn't even a peak, the angle is just so steep that it looks like a peak. Its a rising ridge line that keeps climbing until it meets the western face of Machapuchhare.

[deleted]

No idea, sorry :) i was trekking up the Annapurna basecamp trek, just taking photos as i went, didn't even try to figure out the names.

I know that north of the ice ridge leading up to everast from the west is what appears to be a plain surrounded on all sides by cliffs. It has at its centre a collection of giant frozen temple spires reminicent of Ankor Wat under the ice that is now melting away thanks to global warming.

Annapurna III?

Which one is it?

The OP's picture just looks silly now compared to these.

Not Everest, no.

Don’t want to just assume, but is that Mt. Everest, or a different one?

4 pixels

I could post wider shots taken with a shorter focal length all day long but none will compare to OP's doctored work. A wider lens compresses both the x and y.

Missing the conifers

Totally stretched perspective done in photoshop. Nice fantasyscape. Done for likes, I'm sure.

“Uninstructed view”. There’s literally a tree blocking part of it.

[deleted]

Nah, he's full of shit. Snowboarder.. story is he got to sneak in a day on a work trip. He probably meant he hiked to the top of the bowl accessible from the chair as someone else explained to me.

I think this is comment gives me the perspective i needed. Now i know what people mean when they say they hiked to the top.

Thank you!

[deleted]

It'd be a long ass day lol.

If he was on foot and doing it in a day, he'd likely have to start at about 2am from the trailhead to hike up with crampons and not posthole the whole way. For someone in very good shape and experienced, they could summit around 8-9am. Getting back to the car, grabbing lunch in glacier and heading over to the ski area to check it out wouldn't take more than a couple hours.

If they were on skis, the timing compresses considerably. You'll go (slightly) faster up and way faster down and want to summit later so your getting snow instead of ice. That might be a 4am trailhead start for a 10-11am summit and back to the car before 1pm easy.

It's doable but it's adventurous and takes some crazy legs

A lot of the peaks don't have names, just numbers denominatios based on their height and that's it. (E.g. 'Point 5353')

There are too many peaks to name them all!

It turned out to be an issue in 1999 when India and Pakistan fought a war there and most of the landmarks that India had to recapture did not even have names. (Some were given names during the war).

Lmao those sulfur vents are rough! We submitted Baker a week after doing Shuksan and seeing it at Sunrise above the cloud cover was like nothing else...

So basically what you're trying me is the guy in my office who said he went to baker for 1 day and hiked to the summit, yet also said the rest of the resort was sick was most likely full of shit?

Thats distortion because of telephoto lens. This is a wider shot, so, more conical.

Ski resorts don't often go to summits and Mt. Baker is a glaciated peak. The typical summit route for skiing (that I know of) goes over Colfax glacier specifically. So you need to be a decently experienced ski mountaineer to handle the skiing as well as crevasse concerns as the seasons turn.

The ascent from the trailhead is about 7 miles and 7k feet elevation to reach the summit. The chairs at the ski area only go up to about 6k feet or less and are located northeast of the main mountain area. The summit is around 10.5k feet elevation.

There's plenty of incredible backcountry skiing throughout the Baker area and I believe other summit routes. But nothing a resort or chairs would go near. I just realized it's not even a resort there either. It's just the 'ski area' that has lifts, avalanche mitigation, and half the map marked off as a cliff warning lol.