I am all digital and there is no going back.

Film was an awkward, expensive, polluting medium but was somewhat permanent. I fear most digital images will be erased. Most people are not fully computer literate and don't do backups.

I have switch over primarily to digital, but almost always have a film body with me with several lenses.

I'd shoot more if I had the space to set up a darkroom.

I shot film for 30 years but switched to digital in 2004. I think film will be like old Corvettes, fun to drive but who can afford the time and upkeep.

I prefer black and white film rather than digital, I just like the depth of the photograph better. The contrast, tones, etc, just seem to jump out at me better! I still go to the darkroom with friends on Sunday afternoons at the local university darkroom. I do shoot color with my digital though!

I've shot LOTS of film, however I sold all of my film equipment this past year and I now shoot digital exclusively.

Film's gone! No more polluting and expense. Improvements in Digital imaging and software to mimic the look of different films continues.

Scanning large and medium format film still offer the best value for fine art photography for the low volume photographer. I hope both film and high quality film scanners remain available.

I think there´s no future for 35mm film, but the question is different for bigger formats, I see many years of life for 120, and large format perhaps will exist for decades.

Often shoot 6x6 B&W in final moments of shooting digital when it all looks best. There is a sweetness, a reality that isn't there in digital.

I still have a few rolls of Kodachrome 25 in my fridge. I hear that shortly I will not be able to get it processed. I guess I'll have a keepsake for remembering this incredibly beautiful film.

I recently converted to digital. It's harder to find someone to process film.

35mm slide film, with high end Minolta or Plustek Scanners = fabulous 102Mb rich files. Doesn't that equal a Digital Hasseblad?

In the big picture, digital photos are realitvely new. And who knows how long this format will be around. Technology is refreshing at an alarming rate. I would hate to think images being captured today won't be available in 20, 30 or 50 years. There will be a time when digital photograpy will be viewed as "old school" just like 35mm and Kodachrome. There may not be a vehicle available to view even RAW files. I can imagine a time when you hear "What's an SD card?" Scary, isn't it?

I wouldn't say rarely. There should be a better third option. I would say 1/4 of my work is film based.

If some nice company will replace my Canon F1, 50mm 1.4, 50mm macro, 24mm, 135mm, 100mm macro, 200mm macro, 300mm telephoto, 80-200mm zoom, bellows, and all the other accessories with a camera and lens of equal, then I will go to digital.

When I look at my old film pictures (produced from C41 color negs), they again remind me how much better they look than anything produced digitally. Richer colors, sharper, more beautiful to view overall. I would go back to film in a second if my old labs were still available to process it, enlarge it via light projection, and soup it in real developer, producing a gorgeous, long-lasting print.

I am 71 years of age and for almost 50 years shot film and had my own darkroom. Now I shoot digital and make my own prints. Digital is beautiful!

I do experiment from time to time with cross- processing slide film.

I shoot a few rolls a year playing with cameras from my collection.

I do not find digital to be very appealing you are basically holding a computer in your hands with all the inherent problems of a computer. Also, they seem to pass from one model to the next before the box is unwrapped. Then there is the issue of image degradation over time. I believe the Smithsonian found this out the hard way. I'll stick with film until there is none available, than I'll find another hobby.

The fear that film-making companies will stop production of their emulsions one-by-one as profits from them dwindle. Meanwhile, stocks dwindle, costs of remaining films will increase, which will turn more people toward digital. Shutterbug and other mags are hastening the demise of film by largely ignoring it as a medium for capturing images. Although I am not a big fan of the cult that the lomography movement seems to be trying to develop, I can wholeheartedly applaud their championing of the use of film and film cameras. I wish Shutterbug would likewise champion film.

It is sad to realize that since few casual shooters print out or archive their digital pix there may be no family snaps for future generations to treasure. I have BW pix and negs of my family from the 30s. Given reasonable care they will endure a century longer. Can that be said of the vast majority of pictures made today?

Film is done by those who love the medium. It is passing away as all things can be done digitally now.

I shoot color transparency film almost exclusively, usually Fuji Velvia or Provia, and sincerely hope that transparency film will continue to be available in the future!

I shoot more digital, but still use more film than rarely, I use more medium format film than 35mm or large format, but do use those sometimes.

I shoot exclusively B&W with a Mamiya RB 6x7 and process my own film and prints.

I love shooting Kodachrome, but my output is digital and the hassle, expense and time it takes to process and digitize are push me towards using a DSLR instead of my film cameras. Technology has improved and digital photography is here to stay. RIP Kodachrome.

I've gone back to film from digital; I prefer its colors, palette, etc.