Not entirely, re: losing control with JPG, but RAW is best.
(It's the default jpeg settings that people mistakenly use when uploading to their computers that kills quality.)
Film-no pixellating. But cost, as MM pointed out. Plus, not being able to actually see your shots until that cost has been paid.
Digital: Immediate results and no cost to see your work. Using your digital camera as a hard-drive(more precisely, working directly off the memory card) increases photo quality a great deal and gives you a lot of choices.
Film, what you shot is what you get.
Another problem with film is in shooting black and white;no over-the-counter processings develop it any more. Kodak does make a 'black and white' designed for that, but you can't develop it yourself as a black and white-it comes out purple and of very poor quality.
Many of my professors preferred film(except, ironically, my photography instructor); I prefer digital for now. But I wouldn't be adversed to going back to film if my 35mm's were repaired.
Camera choices are as personal as buying a car. It's what you need it for, what you can afford, how it feels to you, etc. Read everything you can.
You live in one of the most picturesque places in the US-I expect to see some awesomeness very soon!!
__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.
|