The anticipation of dropping off film to be developed, or even spending hours in the dark room doing it yourself, has all but diminished to waiting seconds for your photo to come up on a digital screen.

But when they first came out, digital single-lens reflex cameras were so expensive that only professional photographers used them. Now, for many people, using film is not even an option with all the newer and cheaper digital cameras hitting the market.

With the introduction of the Nikon D40 and Cannon’s digital Rebel, the average person can now afford a semi-professional digital SLR camera. So has film been replaced, or does it still have a purpose in today’s fast-paced society?

“It all depends on the end use,” explained Vicki DaSilva, a professional photographer who specializes in long exposures. She said that digital is streamlined for commercial use, but film goes along with the tradition of fine-art photography — and even though it is more labor intensive, you come out with a better quality image. “As long as they keep developing film, I’m good to go,” DaSilva concluded. Michelle Lacey, a junior in art and design who shoots with both a Minolta XGM film camera and a Cannon Digital Rebel, said she doesn’t have a clear-cut favorite. “I like them both for different reasons,” Lacey said. “Film is more pure, but digital is more versatile and cost efficient.” Lacey said she enjoys processing her own film because she feels like the prints are a part of her, as opposed to the instant gratification of digital images. Many of the students in Lacey’s intermediate studio class had the same love for film, but used digital because of its convenience. Alina Patel, a junior in art and design, said if she could pick only one camera to use, she would choose digital over film because she can check her photos right after taking them.

“You just don’t know with film,” she said. Another major disadvantage with film, according to Patel, is its continuing rise in cost. She explained if money was not an issue, she would only use film.

Lacey and Patel’s professor, Charles Joyner, who has taught photography classes in both digital and film, said film still has a strong instructional advantage over digital.

Joyner explains that the techniques and processes students learn while using film transfer over and pertain to digital very well, giving students better understanding of what they are doing.

“Students are not as willing to investigate with digital because of the ease of just setting it to auto,” he said.

Joyner has his students use black-and-white film in his classes, and makes them develop the film themselves. He said digital definitely has an advantage when it comes to color because no one really develops their own color film anymore.

If you want to maintain color film, Joyner said, you have to take your film to professionals to get the quality you want.

Andrea Stroud, a senior in art and design, said film will have a distinct advantage when it comes to making quality prints, and that digital doesn’t even come close when it comes to the size of prints that can be made.

“It will be 1,000 years before they make a digital sensor that reads light like film does,” Stroud said.

Although film still has a large image quality advantage, Joyner said digital is quickly catching up. He explains that even in the last few years, the image size digital cameras provide has grown exponentially, and digital is starting to surpass film in many areas.

“One of the main advantages of using film used to be shooting in low light, but just recently, with some of the newest digital cameras, digital has far surpassed film,” Joyner said.

For Joyner, it really doesn’t matter if you use film or digital — the quality is more dependent on the person behind the camera.

“Two things make a good photographer,” he said. “Looking at a lot of photos, and taking a lot of photos.”