I have not had a chance to read everyones thought on this, however, here are a few of the reasons why I still photograph using film:
--It is what I learned, and what I am use to.
--At this point, I believe that I can achieve a certain aesthetic that I am not capable of achieving with digital photography, at least not at this point, by simply using different ASA films speeds, different developer combinations, and adding additives that also manipulate the grain structures of the film, or hole back the highlights, while expanding the mid-tones. Also, in reference to color, I do not think that the computer is able to replicate the look of kodachrome or velvia; perhaps I am mistaken, yet if I am, at least I am not able to replicate the look digitally.
--I do believe that for black and white, that the technology is not quite there yet, perhaps in the future, but not yet anyway.
--One of the major reasons why I still photograph with film is because of the tangibility of film. I love being able to hold a negative or slide in the palm of my hand, or being thumb through my neg carriers, after years of work and rediscover that one image that I have forgotten about, or looking for that one image, and you discover an image that you overlooked years before.
--If I were to move in the direction of digital, I am 100% dependent of finding an efficient way of archiving my work, and being able to find this project years later might take a miracle. Also, I would be inclined to just quickly delete images that I thought were not worthwhile; when maybe if I just held on to them, I might have a change of heart and rediscover something that I did not see before. With film, I have never thrown away an image or a group of images just because I thought they were images that have little value to me at the time, and maybe 90% of them are, but there is, from time to time, that one image that I come across years later to discover all over again.
--So, tangibility is a key reason. I have a couple of friends, one who also used film, the other all digital. The friend of my who used film, spent some money to have his film scanned so he can put it up his website. He had a problem where all the files became corrupted, or something happened to the disks, however, he was relieved that he still had the original film files. The other friend, was all digital, and his files stored on his computer and a few external hard drives. His computer became infected with viruses, and lost all the files on his computer files, and something happened to his hard drives where he also lost the files. At least if something happens to my computer equipment, I will still have the negatives or slides that I can rescan.
I am not on the fence with film or digital, it is still film for me as long as film is still available, and if that day comes, I will just go further back into photographic history and use alternative processes, such as daguerrotypes, tin types, or glass plates.
In reference to scanning or printing; I do both. If it black and white, I do most of that work myself, when I photograph using color slide film, I scan the images that I like and make digital prints, and if cibachrome still existed, which I think it does, but not near where I live, would still probably choose the digital output processes instead of cibachrome.
--If all of my gear was stolen, I would probably still replace it with film cameras, and because of tangibility, and the preferred aesthetic of film over the digital processes.
I don't know, maybe one day, when I am tired and older than I am now, I may change to digital, but for now, I will keep plugging along.
