>>2625005Yeah, but huge dynamic range, analog resolution, better color response, etc. are kind of a big deal. Digital is lacking in these areas (right now).
You're assuming a fuckton right there. I take a lot of pictures, both digitally and with film, but film is superior as a medium. Digital is more practical and efficient, but it is currently lacking enough that I would say it is still the lesser medium.
Like I said, when Foveon-styled sensors get better, then I'll stop shooting film forever. I don't like the idea of all the chemicals involved, and the work is much less efficient. But for right now, film IS better, in so many ways.
It's also much more satisfying. It feels like every photo is a labor of love. When I get a good digital photo it's certainly a great experience, but it's nowhere near as mindblowingly awesome as developing film and having the picture be exactly what you wanted to be. It's that instant gratification vs. patience thing.
