Ever since the introduction of the digital camera, a war has raged within the photography community. There are those that claim 35 mm film is the one “true professional” media and digital its casual counterpart. Conversely as costs go down and quality increases, there is an ever expanding group of professional photographers who shoot only in digital. So what’s a consumer to think? Is 35mm still the way to go, or is it time to trade up for a new digital model? It’s time to break each format down and seal this deal, once and for all.

Digital Photography: Amateur?
It is true that there are many digital cameras on the market, and like their 35mm counterparts there is an endless supply of variables that can impact the images each one is capable of producing. Image quality (in terms of depth of field and color contrast) has always been a major concern for those that choose digital and is still one of the most common excuses heard from the opposition. Add to this the fact that finding a digital camera that could match the sheer raw data contained in a photograph on film was both arduous and incredibly expensive, and the 35mm enthusiast has a fairly solid argument.

But fortunately for the consumer, the price of an excellent digital camera has dropped steeply in the last few years, while the “quality for the dollar” has increased dramatically. Canon’s popular “Digital Rebel” line of SLRS (single lens reflexes) have given people an affordable entry level camera with near professional results for under $1,000. And since Canon isn’t the only camera company in the world, it’s a safe bet consumers can look forward to even better cameras at even lower prices as manufacturers double their efforts to be first in line at the retail counter.

35mm: Is it Antiquated?
These days why use film at all? It’s certainly no secret that film has an unforgiving and often expensive learning curve, and recent trends show that more people prefer digital for just those reasons. After all, when shooting a big event like a Super Bowl, would it be better to have the potential for thousands of shots, or just the film in the bag? Sports Illustrated photographers answered that question by shooting over 16 thousand images in 2004’s bowl, entirely in digital.

However, just as some music enthusiasts claim that everything sounds better on a record, there are plenty of photographers who agree that there is no matching the warmth and familiarity of a fresh roll of film. In fact, developing film manually and printing photos in a darkroom is one of the most rewarding and hands on photography experiences one can have. Sure, photos can be powerfully edited using tools like Adobe Photoshop to remove almost any imperfection, but clicking a mouse is very different than the tactile sensations of a darkroom. And of course, having someone else print up a roll of film can take as little as an hour.

And the Winner is…
Neither! Based on the availability of technology and the vast resources devoted to this topic, there’s really no single point that wins this battle. As with many debates, the winner here is going to be entirely up to the needs and desires of the individual. Families wanting to take pictures and share their memories on the fly often choose digital due to its instant gratification and convenience, while others like having photo prints to display them in a picture frame or album. No matter what you choose, in the end, people can still easily print out their pictures so they can hang them on the wall in collage picture frames or display them on a desk or dresser in a special unique picture frame.Thanks to powerful yet affordable innovations in digital and the classic, do-it-yourself familiarity of film, the choice is now directly in the hands of the consumer- right where it belongs.