I don't think there is a better way to learn photography, than using an 8x10 camera. It teaches you how to see outside of the camera, compose and treat each frame as something worthwhile.
Saying that and with respect to the artists mentioned, I don't believe there is an inch of difference between shooting an 8x10 camera and one of today's modern or almost modern digital backs.
This week we were doing an image search through one of our servers and came upon some old 8x10 film drum scans. Beautiful scans, very nice look, but looking at them close the only difference I saw was the slight grain, which can easily be added in post.
Large film may seem romantic and to some galleries and collectors more "pure", but I think at this stage in photography film is more of a romantic notion of the past than it is any real artistic of technical improvement.
The only think I know that film does easier (short of having a lab process it), is when you put strong light behind a subject film tends to wrap smoother and seems to have less of an abrupt cut off than digital. the only other plus I see from film of any format is . . . well actually I don't.
Even if you shoot film 99.999% are still going into the digital domain and require photoshop, then purposed either back out in a chemical or ink jet print. In fact of many of the fine artists film photographers everyone mentions, more than you would every know place their images in retouching and then output to a wet print. They may not admit it in a press release, but I've seen it time and again.
Once again, shoot with the camera you like,. enjoy and learn from the process, but remember it's only the final image that matters, not the capture device.