Well, it's funny and almost ironic that you mention the importance of light and the use of a digital camera in one post :) Maybe I'm just weird, old fashion or simply stupid, but I feel digital cameras just miss the most important step in photography - the influence of light on your specific type of film. I that respect I feel every digital camera that's now on the market (including the Nikon D1x is still many steps beyond analog cameras. I'm really annoyed when I have a look at a digital camera and they are trying to explain to me that it's so incredibly sharp, that you can store so many photo's, etc. Why would anyone want that, other than for those silly holiday or party shots ? Okay, for photo journalists, who are on the other side of the world, it's a prefect solution. The only reason that would make me get rid of my 35mm equipment is to move to medium format. Sorry, I'm getting carried away :P About light, I just meant to say that both light and the choice of film can produce so many great and unbelievable results.....on a digital camera your 'film' is just one simple constant 'value', there's no difference in grain, contrast, or whatever. Although Nikon's D1 range is really nice, just for the ability to use real 35mm lenses instead of those weird things they stick on other digital camera's. (Especially being able to use ED or AFS lenses is nice). Again, to me, personally, digital photography is not a substitute of photography on a pro level. Bart PS I: Didn't mean to offend anyone, and my apologies if anyone feels offended. PS II: love that photo btw :P