Rather than allow a thread spin off in wild abandon:
Words from the great Ansel Adams . . .
Donald and I kept the discussion on topic, but I feel the premise and proposed tangent was worthy of serious discussion.
I do recommend that all read the parent thread and watch the youtube videos that Elise contributed.
Now, to the essence of the discussion:
If you look into the world of large format photographers, you'll find people who use digital technology, along with those who are exclusively B&W film, the preserved antique technologies are often feature magazine articles, some work in color, others a mix of color and B&W. You'll find a range of lens brands, camera types, and film sizes. But it is all done in an accepting open environment with out any pressure to do anything in any specific way. It usually is "Look at this photo, and this is what I used to get it". The only pressure, if any, is to get together and shoot photos.
In the Art vs Photo front, a truce seems to have set in long ago. You'll have the occasional hot spot crop up, like North and South Korea occasionally lobbing a missile at the other. Still, Artists and Photographers are no longer at each other's throats and the war is pretty much over.
By contrast, I have seen the "Digital vs Film" flame war crop occasionally. It's usually not pretty as both camps seem to hold so strongly upon their chosen path and express highly emotional views of "Which is Better".
Lets end this once and for all, but when done lets all remain standing, alive, not bleeding ( much ), and proud to be shooting photos how ever we choose. In the end, We all should be able to marvel at the photograph and the photographic technology chosen to take it.
So, who in their right mind, or not so right mind ( Well, who here hasn't shot photos of trash cans, expanses of boring bodies of water, and oddly shaped shadows ? ), feels like they are under attack by photographers using differing methods and technologies ?
Lets discuss, not flame, and see why so many have such perceptions.