Film vs digital for long exposures
I understand reciprocity rule so not my question. My question is this: When I use film, like asa 100 extar, provia, etc I am able to take very long expsoures, like 5-10 minutes or even longer and I do not notice any "noise" grain in the pictures making them unusable. When I shoot digital, I have to watch for temperature, length of expsosure, use noise reduction in pre and post. The hotter it is outside, the longer the exposure, the worse it is is. Especially when you have a firefly convention. It is a lot of work to take dark frames, bias frames, light frames stack them proprly, etc to get an image especially if your image is more than about 30 seconds in length, even at iso 100 (or the native iso for the camera) And when you are employing tilt/shift/rise/fall with the lens (I use Canon TS/E lens for digital stuff) your sensor just gets plain hot.
Am I correct in that I can take very long exposures with film and not have any similar problems to worry about. I have made some at 5-7 minutes in length, fairly warm out and did not see any degradation of the image. so is there a point in which film will not yield satisfactory results with the grain/noise becoming too much? Like I stated though, I have not seen it, yet, that is.
Read responses in largeformatphotography.info