Very nice B&W photos.
Not sure what a Canon Qtb is though.
I agree if you do your own B&W processing there is a possible savings if you own the equipment already or plan on doing large volumes with newly purchased equipment.
Color is more complex to DIY but can be done as well.
I believe someone once costed out a $3,000 digital system vs film costs which was an interesting way to see where actual savings occurred when in digital.
I use film sparingly so cost is absolutely not an issue, less than a good dinner out with my wife.
But again some very good shots and thank you for sharing.

Not true, again from you..

Some real artists are still using film for the look it gives. And Universities are still teaching film classes.

I taught a 35mm B&W film course at a state university, and the students were enthusiastic to delve into a different media . It caused some of them learning pains with the development process and all, and having to wait to see their images. But the discovery process of printing in the darkroom was a revelation that many enjoyed, once they got the hang of it.

Yes I love my digital cameras and all their advantages, but don't go knocking film for everyone.

Not everyone needs instant gratification .

Not all painters use the same brushes and paints to create their art. There is still room in this world for diversity in creativity and mediums.

Cheers

Yet anoter this vs. that thread.

Film and digital are simply two different mediums in photography. From a practical point of view, there are advantages and disadvantages, pros and cons for both. Most of the issues are in actual production. Artistically speaking, either medium can be employed to create "art" provide the photographer is artistically talented and is so inclined.

There is a serious misconception that film/chemical/darkroom work requires more skill, craftsmanship and technical ability than digital imaging. That is patently untrue. Digital requires an equal but different set of technical skills and in many ways are less forgivng than film work. Digital imaging technology is more accurate and sensitive than film and results can suffer from more errors on the part of the photographers as well as more optical problems.

I would go so far as to say that many folks who dislike digital imaging, have not learned to use it as yet and do know how to maximize its potential.

As for film, I spent at least 1/3 of my life in the darkroom and colour labs in my studio. I do miss some of the tools, methods and craftsmanship involved in the process. Sadly, most of the emulsions, papers and materials as well as much of the chemistry are no longer available. I certainly do not miss the caustic chemicals and a high degree of maintenance and chemistry-control monitoring that is required to maintain quality and cleanliness in a professional lab.

Many of the folks who think they know to develop black and white film don't actually know how to do that in order to maximize image quality and produce crisp clean grain. There are methods whereby a 35mm negative can yield the same quality as medium or large format films. So if you are gonna do that, do it right. That's a good topic for another thread.