Why Go Digital Instead of Film?
"The Good..."

Cost
If the saying "time is money" is true, then reason number one is that digital tends to be less expensive over-all.

That's not saying that the initial setup isn't just as expensive, in fact, the initial setup for the beginning digital photographer tends to be quite expensive if you factor in the camera, computer, printer and media.

However, the time and convenience offered by digital photography eliminates the need for darkrooms (space) and all the safety concerns associated with them. It also eliminates the need to put your only negative in the hands of someone else to print, thereby avoiding the possibility of lost or damaged negatives. As digital photography takes over, the initial setup cost should drop significantly.

Speed
Digital photography is faster than traditional film photography in terms of workflow. This means that from shooting to output (print/web) the time required is significantly shorter when shooting digital.

Film photography limited you to how many images you could capture per roll of film, which made stopping and changing film necessary. Digital photography uses digital media for storing large quantities of images quickly.

Because an image is already recorded as data, the need for scanning an image in, to be used for publication, is no longer necessary; this also allows it to be transfered almost instantaneously around the world.

Flexibilty
With digital photography, you are able to change settings regardless of what or how you are shooting such as white balance, film speed, and exposure compensation, because each image is independent.

When using film, you are stuck with the type, speed and color balancing until you either finish the roll or rewind it mid-way through.

Availability
As of the year 2005, more digital cameras were reported sold than film cameras worldwide; that includes all the disposable plastic cameras.

That figure may not seem that significant except that it marks the changing of the guard. Eventually film cameras will become difficult to find and things like chemistry, film and darkroom processing equipment will become scarce and expensive. Already certain traditional camera icons have converted their product lines or completely folded.




Problems with Digital Photography
"The Bad..."

Exposure Latitude
The biggest problem with digital cameras is it's relatively short range of exposure values described as exposure lattitude.

Traditional negative film had the ability to capture about 5 stops of light (2 under and 3 over) which is how disposable cameras are able to work in such a wide range of lighting situations.

Digital sensors are closer in range to positive film (slides) in that they have a smaller lattitude (about 2-3 stops; 1-2 under, and one over) meaning that it is more difficult for the sensor to accurately represent a scene with a large variation of light sources.

This link has a good run-down on the differences between film and sensors:

http://www.shutterbug.com/pointofview/0303sb_point/

Shutter Lag
The number one complaint (not problem, but complaint) with point and shoot digital cameras is the issue of shutter lag.

Shutter lag is the delay from the time you press the shutter release button to the time the shutter actually opens, closes and records the image to the media.

Because most people use their point and shoot cameras for snapshots, they are usually on an automatic mode, meaning their cameras are making all the decisions for them. Because digital cameras are all software driven, they have to make a lot of decisions before they are allowed to open the shutter, and then they have to record and process all the recorded data; this is what is causes the delay.

Even in some point and shoot film cameras you will find some shutter lag while the camera tries to focus on some dimly lit subject (won't even let you take the shot usually) however, most film cameras don't have to do much more than open and close the shutter, the film does the rest, meaning there is very little or no shutter lag.

Print Quality
Although close, digital photographs still fall short when it comes to resolution, ease of color management, and black and white images.

-- Because the resolution of a digital print has come so close to most fine grain color prints, and with the help of print dot technology, most people won't notice a difference and in fact, many photographs going to publications won't show the negligable difference.

-- Color management on the other hand is a huge headache that has seen huge advantages in the last few years, and with the new Mac and Windows operating systems, promises to be more tamed and user friendly in the near future (though not yet with Vista or Leopard).

-- Epson's K3 ink system is pretty good matching the tonal range of traditional black and white prints, without huge color casts, but the ability to print black and white digital prints that have the same "feel", or what I call "lushiness", of traditional black and white prints is still missing. This inability to match traditional black and white prints is due to the depth, distribution and quantity of the silver hallide in the paper's emulsion, and so far no digital printer can reproduce that quality.



"And The Ugly..."

Planned Obsolescence (Upgrades)
Like a junkie to his fix (paraphrasing my friend Aaron Romine) you will always need your upgrade. Bigger, better, mega, giga, terra...