It was somewhat inevitable that i’d get dragged into this debate at somepoint… it’s not like i’ve made much of an effort to avoid it.
For the record, here is my current thinking, in response to the latest: “Don’t believe the film hype! … Just looked at your latest stuff, really nice… want to shoot together so i can compare film and digital?” interaction.
As far as i’m concerned, the whole film / digital thing is pretty much a aesthetic choice.
On one hand digital is precise / fast / easy, and on the other it’s sterile / cold / disposable.
(The actual adjectives are unimportant, and the choice just reflects my current aesthetic.)
By the same token, film is organic / warm / slow / awkward / precious.
It’s a little like audio i guess; in most cases it doesn’t make any difference, amplification is amplification – you can hear it… that’s enough. But there still people out there, perhaps overly focused on result(?) that swear by insanely old fashioned, inherently flawed, things like valve amps…
Yeah, so if digital is doing it for you… i say go with it. It wasn’t doing it for me, and i’m happy that i tried something else.
The chances of this being my last word on the subject are minimal. Wish i was confident enough in my photographs to tell people to judge by the results.