BigSky Photo Art wrote:
Most of my life has been shooting 35mm slr cameras.  I don't get into the ones that do everything for you automatically.  I do my own exposure settings and so on. 
I DO have a small digital camera that has proven to be quite useful and very effective as well.  I would even consider using it in a shoot if it weren't for the fact that everyone seems to have this pre imposed idea of what sort of camera is supposed to be used for serious shoots. 

Other people's misconceptions are rarely a good basis for a decision.

BigSky Photo Art wrote:
The point of this thread is to defend film cameras and the ability to archive images perfectly.

They don't need to be defended, any more than pickup trucks need to be defended in light of the fact that many people drive sports cars.

BigSky Photo Art wrote:
CDs however...  or whatever format you want to use...  usb sticks, s/d cards whatever...  If your file is corrupted it's gone.  Or... you could copy your images onto scads more sticks, cards, CDs and so on.... 
I like the idea of storing my film away as a hardcopy so to speak and if anything goes wrong I always have the film to make more digital files.  To me that's the ultimate archive.

That's a very warped rationalization.  Fear of the unknown, maybe?

BigSky Photo Art wrote:
What's your thoughts?

My thoughts: for the love of all that is holy, not another film vs. digital thread!