In article <4m2fbd$kpi@elna.ethz.ch>, loeffel@iis.ee.ethz.ch says...

>This is a question about SUBJECTIVE perception of depth of field.
>Say you have a landscape photograph taken using the hyperfocal
>distance.
>Is it just me, or is softness at the picture's horizon more annoying
>than softness at the near point?

It is a good observation. I think it has to do with most of the detail/texture being similar in scale and predominantly finer near infinity (requiring sharp rendering). Nearby photographed objects
technically have parts that are similar in scale to the infinity
subjects, but a large proportion of nearby subject detail/texture
can be rendered successfully at reduced sharpness without looking
soft, since so much of it is usually large-scale.

>I have learned the hard way to be very picky about focusing my far >point (often the far away horizon). When I expose at f/22, I use my >lenses' DOF marks of f/11 for the far point.
>However, the near point is more forgiving. If the composition dicates,
>I sometimes use the f/22 DOF mark for my near point for an f/22
>exposure.

Another way of doing this is to fudge the "hyperfocal" distance
nearer to infinity, then stop down one f-stop more than the smaller
stop recommended by the DOF scale. I find that infinity must either
be rendered VERY sharply, or very softly, or the photo looks bad -
an "almost sharp" infinity rendering appears to me to be simply unintentionally out of focus. (In other words, basically what you
have already said......;-)

>Basically, I am deliberately focusing a bit closer to infinity than
>the hyperfocal distance.
>I think the reason that far point softness is far more annoying
>is that the horizon is often a long, contrasty edge, whereas
>the foreground often features many cluttered objects. Plus, the
>features at the near point are rendered larger and therefore appear
>sharper.
>My lenses are Mamiya 645 line. Their DOF marks are based on a circle of
>confusion of 0.045 mm.
>For me, depth of field is the largest limitation of medium format
>landscape work.
>What do you think?
>Frank Loeffel

What MF really needs is tilt-shift lenses!
Hope This Helps