This is one of my pet peeves-

There can be so much heated debate about the word 'Bokeh' which actually refers to identifiable qualities within a picture, but when did people start referring to film photography as analogue photography? To me, it just implies that it's the opposite of digital, like Dog is the opposite of Cat...

This is not a Film v. Digital argument, more of a question- given, in particular, the effects of reciprocity on the exposure of film, can it properly be termed 'Analogue' at all, or is it just a digital age affectation? Also, since a grain of silver is either exposed and developed, or unexposed and dissolved, surely it's more akin to a 1 0 digital, em, analogy, for want of a better word?

If it can be argued that traditional photography is Analogue, then I'll accept it, but if there's dissent, then I might prefer to continue calling it film, or wet-plate, or whatever it is...