[ddp]

Thanks all for looking, and the comments.

Regarding the film vs. digital debate - I will use the last shot as an example, since William pointed that one out. Film was Kodak Portra 160VC, lens was the 35 Summilux Apsherical. That lens is a recent acquisition, one that I do not regret. My 35 Summicron asph was nice, but this.....wow. In any case - this image, and a number of the others I shot that day have detail in places that would have been rendered differently in a digital format. This is not to say that digital would have been an unacceptable choice here, it's more a statement that film lends a more pleasing look. In the deeper shadows, or low light levels - digital files tend to get a bit noisy, much like a video camera when one pushes the gain up to +9db or so. Film can hold the details a bit better, and has a more velvety look.

As William stated, I do work with Nikon DSLR's - so the differences in glass play a part in things as well. The Leica stuff is just outrageous...and for me, the combination of film & the glass is hard to beat (at least for my own personal work.) At work, it's sooner than later and film is a memory here.