I am semi-retired but, oddly, have less time for photography these days, or less energy. But I am starting to try making b/w negatives on 4x5 (as I used to do), which I can develop without a darkroom and then scan for digital printing--I no longer have the big enlarger. I can also attach the Canon to the 4x5s but of course the sensor is tiny compared to the 4x5 film. Still, it does let me use all the big classic lenses and the camera adjustments. My avatar picture here above was taken with an 8x10 camera with the Canon on the back, using a big Schneider lens. Ilford makes a 4x5 paper that you can shoot in the camera instead of negative film, then scan the paper. Because large format is no longer the main format for pros (or anybody but artists and enthusiasts), the cost is lower than it was. I saw somebody who found a Speed Graphic in good working order with good lens for $50 in a junk store, but they still fetch several hundred on eBay. I learned large format from books (especially Ansel Adams, peace be upon him) at my nearby public library and one old retired pro.

Many years ago film didn't have the high resolution that todays high megapixel digital cameras have. If you wanted large prints, you needed to use large film and a darkroom to process everything. The Speed Graphic used 4" X 5" film and you needed film cassettes to hold the film.

There was no such thing as rapid sequence. If the subject was in motion we had to anticipate the shot and press the trigger button at the perfect moment, if there was one.

You had to insert the cassette in the back of a Speed Graphic, remove a light-proof panel and take the photo. The lenses were usually f:4.8 or smaller and you usually needed a bulb flash for indoor photos. I had a Crown Graphic in 1959 and took a lot of great photos.

I also still have a Rolleiflex 2,8D twin lens reflex that takes 2-1/4" square photos on 120 roll film.

People who have always had 35mm cameras and more recently, digital cameras have it so easy. The ability to process photos in Lightroom and Photoshop while sitting in the comfort of an easy chair is wonderful. We can now concentrate on capturing great images and doing creative editing as opposed to learning all the darkroom and chemical processing associated with film. Just the ability to immediately see an image on a display in the back of the camera is now something I take for granted.

I have to admit that the waiting and anticipation associated with film and processing was an exciting part of photography in the days before digital photography.

Here is a site for people who use paper negatives:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1438777439673554/discussion/preview
Many of those members use a homemade box camera with pinhole. You can buy pinholes of good quality on eBay; the larger holes give wider angle, but all of them have extremely deep depth of field. I have thought of using one on the 4x5 but have not tried it.

They often use old paper just to see results.The Ilford paper is positive print paper, very slow: ISO 1. It is ortho high-contrast, but can be more normal with flashing (blank pre-exposure of white light).
https://www.freestylephoto.biz/1171158-Ilford-Direct-Positive-Paper-FB-F1K-Glossy-4x5-25-Sheets

I think you are right that digitizing 35mm film is not seriously better than digital files, though a good medium format neg might scan a bigger and better image. I have not tried it.

The Ansel Adams textbooks are largely irrelevant today except for the optical science and the artistic mindset--and of course large format photography for artists.

Here is a site for people who use paper negatives:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1438777439673554/discussion/preview
Many of those members use a homemade box camera with pinhole. You can buy pinholes of good quality on eBay; the larger holes give wider angle, but all of them have extremely deep depth of field. I have thought of using one on the 4x5 but have not tried it.

They often use old paper just to see results.The Ilford paper is positive print paper, very slow: ISO 1. It is ortho high-contrast, but can be more normal with flashing (blank pre-exposure of white light).
https://www.freestylephoto.biz/1171158-Ilford-Direct-Positive-Paper-FB-F1K-Glossy-4x5-25-Sheets

I think you are right that digitizing 35mm film is not seriously better than digital files, though a good medium format neg might scan a bigger and better image. I have not tried it.

The Ansel Adams textbooks are largely irrelevant today except for the optical science and the artistic mindset--and of course large format photography for artists.