I don't share the view that we will have long-term availability of film; the reality is that it is a secondary and shrinking market under no pressure whatsoever to keep going at the behest of so few. I take the view people should have began skilling up with the alternative (digital) method of photography so they have something to fall back on. It is not the industry's fault that so many will be left with so little to nothing within 10 years. Excellent results are achievable with the alternative method even if film, for all its worth and beauty, will face an ever-tightening noose. You might want to reflect on the loss of a number of films in the last two years, and the likelihood of Fujifilm, dealing with the colour market, discontinuing two more emulsions this year.
It is not the fault of the camera (analog or digital) that the photographer cannot recreate a scene to his satisfaction. It is the fault of the photographer not going equipped with the knowledge of how things are done. It is the height if ignorance for any person here to suggest that digital is obsolete the moment you such a camera. Says who, and on what grounds? People I know here on APUG are producing work on 10 year old digital cameras and that work is beautiful. There is skill involved in it. So too, there is still involved with analog. Says who that they need a camera costing $4,000? And why? True, there is a captive market out there of gear freaks who must have every single pixel to peep at— it is ridiculous: leave them to their misery. It is absolutely unnecessary; one camera for as long as you want it, same as analogue: you don't buy a $6,000 Nikon every 6 months, so where is the argument that the same should apply to digital, supposedly "because it is still evolving"? That's bullshit. Is somebody here going to tell me that RGB screens, profiles, colourimetrics, RIPs... "are still evolving"?
I would like to see film continue for a long time. But you can whistle Dixie until the cows come home that we are going to be hit again with progressive discontinuations until there is too little left to sustain a miniscule market, unless of course you want to step back 140 years and roll your own plates and chemistry. While we have two options at our disposal, both should be used. As I said, it is not the fault of which medium you use, but the fault of the photographer.