I have no issues with his B&W images for what they are, and I'm sure he had fun making them. I've done similar for music videos - OK using digital techniques but I could do the same with analog stills.
My point is that in fact using film or paper negatives it's actually not that common to get all those artefacts/faults very often, so there's a high degree of dliberate intent in the images. So what I'm really questioning why when there's a direct comparison with Digital images, I'd guess it's purely commercial.
And to answer Klainmeister - I would say the same to the photographer face to face, I've done so before & I'll do it again. It's the context the images are used in rather than the images themselves.
thanks for your reply -
i couldn't agree with you more ..
there really isn't a comparison between the 2 media.