Dear Mike,
Digital photographers have to have someone to look down upon, as they are quite low on the totem pole of "real" or "pure" or "better" photographers. It's just like social class: some people are desperate to differentiate themselves from other quite similar people. Consider
Those who coat their own sensitized materials, some of whom look down upon
"Ordinary" large format photographers, some of whom look down upon
Users of medium format, some of whom look down upon
35mm users, some of whom look down upon
Digital photographers
The great thing is that if you try hard enough, you can always find someone else to look down upon. For example, some Leica users are reputed to look down on users of lesser cameras, and certainly, plenty of people look down on Leica users.
Admittedly I regard film as more "real" than digital, but that's because I had over a third of a century of film experience before I even tried digital; early digital cameras were rubbish (low resolution, overpriced); early digital evangelists were idiots ("14 megapixels equate to medium format quality!"); and I was much better at using film. Today the main reason I regard it as more "real" is that film cameras last longer: I don't like being forced to buy new tools because the old ones are no longer reparable. But I still have an M8, an M9 and a Nikon Df (and a dead D70). And several dozen "real" cameras, from a Minolta 16 to a 12x15 Gandolfi.
Cheers,
R.
