You should draw with that charcoal
I hate it when people think just because I tote around a Nikon F4 with a 50mm or a RZ67 that I'm some super rich photog from NYC. Then I tell them that I paid $350 for my RZ, then they see the results and they think I'm a liar.
I also hate it when my friend Cat thinks digital is sooooo much better then film because "ya know, you get all scratches and hairs on film" Oh the silly things blond girls say :p
Last year, when I worked at the photo studio in the mall, they had to clean their digicams every day. Cleaning a digicam is very touchy work. If you scratch the sensor, the entire camera is trashed.
Even cameras that have "automatic sensor cleaning" and "dust removal" dust is still a problem.
Automatic sensor cleaning merely places a static electric charge across the sensor plane, causing the dust to be repelled from the surface. The dust doesn't go anywhere. It's still inside the camera, free to be attracted back to the sensor at any time. According to Murphy, usually the least convenient time.
Dust removal programs don't remove the dust. They just cancel it out the way that dust removal from a scanner works. The data is stored in memory and used to digitally remove dust from the picture before it is stored. The problem is that data is altered and there is no way to see what your image really looked like before the computer inside the camera did its magic. That's why most digicams with dust removal programs have a way to either turn it off or clear the memory.
Further, if dust, dirt or smudges get on the lens, there's nothing that ANY camera can do to compensate. The lens must be removed from the camera and manually cleaned. When you remove the lens from the camera, guess what? The inside of the camera is exposed to dust.
Dust is a problem for all photographers. Digitographers just handle it differently.
I do concede, however, that spotting a photograph digitally, using Photoshop, is a whole lot faster than doing it by hand with a spotting brush!