A thread of images from very high altitudes

[William Whitaker]

Oh, you mean "high elevation"....
"High Altitude" implies aerial, as in from an airplane, etc.

[Jerry Bodine]

Oh, you mean "high elevation"....
"High Altitude" implies aerial, as in from an airplane, etc.

Not so. Climbers/backpackers use altimeters to assist in routefinding, etc. If they were to use an elevation device, it'd be called an elevator (AKA a lift).

[Struan Gray]

I've never heard of Himalayan climbers suffering from "Elevation sickness" - sounds more like something architects suffer from.

Struan ('Has been high')

[Richard M. Coda]

After reading these I am embarrassed that I have never photographed (with a large format camera) higher than... 7214 ft.
Moonrise, Glacier Point, Yosemite, 1989, 4x5 Tri-X

[Heroique]

After reading these I am embarrassed that I have never photographed (with a large format camera) higher than 7214 ft.

Perception is everything!

This is from the Olympic Mountain range (Wash. state) and only 5,000 feet or so.

Not too high. To be sure, the range itself is not high at all – its tallest mountain, Mount Olympus, doesn't even reach 8,000 feet. No wonder. These were never volcanic mountains, though they are still being formed by the action of subducting plates. It's a curious case of mountain building should you wish to look into it.

I’m looking Northeast across Puget Sound – the snowy peak out there is in a very different, and much higher range, the North Cascades. Volcanic indeed. That's Mount Baker, a volcano that spewed terrific clouds of steam back in the 1970's, which excited the children and worried the adults.



Tachi 4x5
Schneider XL 110mm/5.6
A touch of forward lens tilt
Fuji Tungsten 64 (w/ 85b filter)
Epson 4990/Epson Scan

[analoguey]

Hugo's photographs show the North Face, and standard base camp on that side is a little lower than the Nepalese one.

My mountaineering and LF photography never overlapped. My knees don't thank me for much, but for that at least they give a smidgen of thanks.

Ah! Okay. I thought it was about 21k the base camps.

In the Northern Himalayas, we've lot of passes and roads around 16+k so seemed quite low.
I was with a bunch of people on that trip and even as I shot with my DSLR, they were quite exasperated to stop or even slow down for pictures that didnt include them. I hope to do it alone sometime soon - with a LF camera, if I can.

Perception is everything!

This is from the Olympic Mountain range (Wash. state) and only 5,000 feet or so.



Tachi 4x5
Schneider XL 110mm/5.6
A touch of forward lens tilt
Fuji Tungsten 64 (w/ 85b filter)
Epson 4990/Epson Scan

Thats a nice snap.
And since we're at 5,000ft, my current city of residence is at 3,000ft... can I post some? ;-)

[Heroique]

That's a nice snap. And since we're at 5,000ft, my current city of residence is at 3,000ft ... Can I post some? ;-)

If they make the viewer feel high, I say go for it!

[austin granger]

I'd say this is at about 7,500 feet. That's not tremendously high I guess, but I did lug my camera up here, and it hurt, so I think I should get partial credit.

Mount Hood from Cooper Spur by austin granger, on Flickr

[austin granger]

This is a little higher, around 8,500 feet, and near the end of the line on this side of Mount Hood, at least for mere mortals such as myself. People do climb from here, but it's a technical route, and much more dangerous than those on the west side. A lot of people have died above Cooper Spur.

The inscription on the rock was left by a Japanese climbing party in 1910. From my understanding, it reads:

Left side: Mie Ken Jin – Ito (Person from Mie State, [Mr.] Ito)

Right side: Hiroshima Ken Jin (Person from Hiroshima State)

English portion:

July 17th 1910
Monument
[Mr.] S. Takahashi

There is nothing further known about these people.

Hiroshima Rock, Cooper Spur, Mount Hood by austin granger, on Flickr