Pragmatic. I find that insightful in the context of this discussion. Can you expand on that and explain what you mean by it? Thank you.
In my mind-
we do not share this with clients before that date lol- artistically and commercially I was hitting my stride late 1990's and by 2006 I had fully transitioned to scanning everything for consumption. I had to reinvent how I created originals knowing they would be scanned and potentially viewed at the pixel level. Since then there hasn't been a hiccup.
There was no mathematically logical formula to justify stopping what was working so effectively- for not only me but others as well- and switch to a process in its infancy and hope it plays out and I can duplicate my output within a completely digital workspace.
But if I failed in the transition mid-career wouldn't I be the schmuck? I had what I wanted and what I needed. Certainly if I was involved in a discipline such as shooting NFL Football my perspectives and the benefits of changing to a 1DxMkll or D5 would be immediate but then I would not have been shooting manual MF film in the first place.
I believe sticking with what I knew and can do- like the old dinosaur I was accused of being in 2010- was the logical move for me. As it has turned out, there has been a continuing respect for film in the right hands and I have never seen any job loss over the years due to my equipment or the time frame required to do my job.
There has been no romanticism for my equipment over those years- I just want to record what I want to record. I shot Mamiyas, 'Blads, and assorted 645's before I settled on the Pentax system because it fit in my hand and simply just worked.
For all the wonderful devices currently available, different is not always better and I do not need
different for its own sake or to be energized or entertained. I do not doubt that at some point I will buy a digital rig and do what I can with it... though not till I have retired and there are no expectations.