Advantages of 35mm over digital?

I would like to know the advantages of shooting on film vs a digital format. I normally shoot on either. I use 35mm film, super 8mm, 16mm. But I also have two Sony Alphas, a Canon DSLR and a Nikon DSLR.

I've been working with both formats for years now, but I would like to hear from you.

The old "film vs.digital" arguments have gone on for years, and there has to be millions of lines of text on this issue online. Each has it's pros and cons, and each has it's lovers and haters. I have typed long hours on this very subject on various forums, including here, and I'm just not going to go all over it again. I could make a list an arm long for the pros and cons of each format.

YOU are the one who has to decide which you prefer. Also, as you seem to have discovered, you don't have to pigeon hole yourself into just one format. Shoot what is best for the circumstance and what is best for the results you want. That is basically how I approach it. There are some situations when digital is the only sensible way to go, … Then there are other situations where film, (and most importantly the film camera used), is what I feel is "right" for the shoot.

Both technologies are available. Use them!

If those dSLRs are yours, I'm wondering why you switched brands twice?

If you've been working with both for years, shouldn't you already *know* what the differences are, and what the advantages of each medium is? Hmm?

I'm a professional photographer. I shot on 35mm and medium-format film for 20+ years. When DSLRs hit about 10MP at high quality, I gave up film and went entirely digital. I can replicate any "film look" I used to get using digital, I don't have to deal with labs and darkrooms and chemicals, and all of my work is faster and more productive.
I'm not nostalgic for film in any way. Some people are -- that's fine, I'm not claiming digital is "the best" for everyone, just "the best" for me and my way of working.

I'll say this and nothing else.

Film responds to light in a nonlinear way the same as the human eye does. Hence, "the film look."

A digital sensor collects and totals photons in a linear fashion.

I think the old fashioned way is always the best, of course there are digital cameras that come close but it's just not the same for me.

The linear way digital sensors work - i.e Bayer type - versus the non-linear way film works. Film dyes' capacity to record color versus digital's. Film's capacity to record image definitioin, versus digital's. Film's archival capability to be archived physically or digitally (and also retrieved, sorted, edited, versus digital's. Film's ability to be printed optically or digitally, versus's digital's inkjet/dye-sub only (although slides can be made of digital but who does?)