Shouldn't the goal be to get the best image you can by any means necessary?
Having said that, it's obvious that film is "real" in that the negs exist in the real world as an image that you can see and touch. They don't reside as bits on a hard drive or memory card where you can't see them because they aren't a real image, they're a virtual image waiting to be an image. There's just something pleasurable about the tactile world of film, and you don't even need a computer or batteries to get an image. It's more of an art medium in that respect. Now once you get your digital image printed, then it's "real". If it's a good image, it's a good image.
I also don't like the way the image came into being, for my work alone, if it's digitally derived. You have to give up too many choices. I want control and choice over the whole process, from film type, to developer, to finished print. And I like the look and feel of a photograph that displays grain in B&W to an artificially smooth digital image. This is what works for me, it doesn't have to work for anyone else.
