If the skier ahead, usually the downhill skier, is able to intercept the skier behind while obeying the laws of physics, that's too close. Clearly the line in your photo is too close.
True, if the skier ahead is a skier and not a stationary object. As soon as you stop, it becomes your responsibility to look uphill and verify that you have room before moving out, just as you'd need to verify that you had room entering a trail from the woods or pulling out of a parking space onto the road. That
should mean looking far enough uphill that someone traveling at a higher rate of speed doesn't need to take evasive action because you decided to move in front of them, but using the car analogy, it
should also mean I don't need to jump on the brakes when you pull out from the ski shop driveway onto the 55-MPH roadway. Assuming that things will happen as they should in either case is likely to result in an undesired outcome.
And while I agree that the first example is far too close, but if you're stopped, I shouldn't need to give you nearly as much room as I would if you're in motion.
I've gotten more and more accustomed to close traffic during the season this year after moving back to New England. I've seen a lot of close passes that would have probably raised eyebrows at the smaller Montana area I'd been at for the past few years, but that didn't seem to bother anyone here. I think skier density has a lot to do with it.
I'd also say that the overall level of skiing—especially hard-snow skiing—is higher here, which tends to "mask" some of the skiers who are capable of handling a moderately high speed (35-45 MPHish)
as long as nothing goes wrong. Since there's a higher number of people traveling at that speed, many of whom actually know how to ski, the ones who don't have any margin of safety left to react to the unexpected don't stand out as much.