It looks as if you have yet to master the digital process?
Oooh that's a brave statement, Stamp; I am quite sure that digital (35mm format - I don't know anything about digital MF other than I can't/won't afford it) has not caught up with film on subject matter such as skin. It has begun to strike me that the plastic skins so currently in vogue are not altogether intentional, but a handy way of losing the native failings of the systems by the simple expedient of exaggeration. Apart from my opinion, the ongoing discussions about whether Nik or Can offer the best skin pallette must mean that neither, in fact, has cracked the problem; there shouldn't be a difference; they should both render the same result. That's supposedly one of the advantages of sensor over film: perfect flatness with no maker's bias... yeah; lenses contribute enough difference already without the need for sensor personality to intrude.
Given in-house E6, and my old 'blads back, plenty of client money etc. I would love to be back with film and pretty girls.
I'm not so sure about the 35mm Kodachrome though, because I think as one ages there also comes a change in outlook: the rapid-fire technique that often results in serendipity and wondrous, unexpected magic isn't forever what stirs the juices; the calm, considered construction of a picture in the viewfinder also has a tremendous kick with suitable subjects.
Perhaps that's partly the explanation for the continued presence of the view camera today, but even when I had to, I disliked using them. But I was a kid then...
Rob C