I've had this debate for a long time with myself. Film or digital?
Since 2001 or so I've been using my ZX-M for all my shots. Within the last two years my interest in taking serious, technically proficient photographs has really heated up. I've taken all my rolls since 2006 to one Target store or another, to have them processed and scanned, all for about $3 a roll. Problem is I've encountered several inconsistencies with them, ranging from weird image sizes, to dirty negatives, to
scratched negatives.
All along I've said 'oh no, no digital for me, I like to kick it old school.' I had it in mind to home process my film, and scan the negatives myself. But, still, I'm intrigued by digital, and I can't find anyone I know, so far, to tell me NOT to get a digital camera. At this point, then the question becomes, 'will I take BETTER pictures with a digital camera?'
So I'm faced with the following:
1) buy a digital camera, in this case a K10D, and use my film camera topursue learning the darkroom process for the 'artsy' aspect.
2) invest in a film scanner, ala the Microtek M1 Pro, for instance, and develop and scan my own film.
Like
woof mentioned, I don't like the 'shoot 30 images and pick the best one' that comes along with a digital camera. I'd rather the one or two shots I make be the best ones. But perhaps from what I've already learned from film shooting, I might be more conscientious of the digital pictures I take, where each one will be exactly as I intended them to be...
This is the stuff that keeps me up at night.