FrankS said:
In addition to what has already been stated: I am more serious about my photography than the average consumer snapshooter. I like the fact that there is a different and more convenient process for them (digital) to do their thing to satisfy their needs and make them happy. Using film and printing in my darkroom is my way of honouring/expressing my dedication to the traditional photographic process and a way of differentiating myself from the masses; not only with results but also in process. I like the idea of being known as an old fashioned, traditional photographer. I like the idea of carrying on a tradition and preserving knowledge.
Well said, Frank.
I am adding another perspective.
Very often folks in digital photography talk about 'workflow', efficiency, cost effectiveness, productivity, etc. These are economic concepts and terminology that I deal with everyday at work (my background is indeed economics), and I don't think it fits into photography when it is regarded as an art form. Sure, some photographers might want to pursue commercial photography, where all these concepts apply and direcly affect business success or failure.
Photography for me is not a business, it is something I enjoy, especially the tradition darkroom process. If someone likes to view and even purchase my work it makes me tremendously happy, but I am not running a production line of 1,000 bestselling images out of 300,000 shots.
Some works by Bach, Mozart, Beethoven took years to finish. Not comparing myself with these genius, but their passion for musical art comes before productivity and efficiency. W. Eugene Smith is known to have spent days or weeks in the darkroom on one print, and have consequently caused so much conflict with the production side of Life Magazine publishing, and eventually led to a break up. Well, look at any Life magazine photo collection today and whose photographs appear in every single one of them?
I am not saying that all digital photographers pursue the 'production' stream. In fact, there are many digital photographers who are very dedicated in creating their images. I admire a lot of digital work. Yet for many others, when asked 'why not film?' their answers are often associated with cost effectiveness, ease and speed of production, etc, etc. Worse, there are some photographers who have not even been in a wet darkroom to experience the quality and possibilities, and are quick to reject this method solely based on economics/productivity reasons.