I just got back from the local book shop and flipped through 5 consumer photography publications. They were all basically one giant, digital love fest. Digital advertisements blanketing nearly every page. Digital vs. Traditional articles in all the mags I flipped through always 'concluded' that digital was better than traditional. I'm starting to wonder how clouded or influenced their judgement is? These publications are funded by advertisements which are promoting digital hardware. How could the writers possibly say anything negative about digital without getting fired? One writer said his digital epson prints far exceeded any known silver printing process! Another writer said his process of using an inkjet printer was far better on the environment! He forgot to mention the environmental impact of all his computer hardware, ink, used up cartridges, special injet papers, power consumption, etc, etc, etc. It's like something out of a bad movie. I thought I was going to gag in the middle of the book shop. Is it just me, or have all the articles in consumer photo mags become nothing more than advertisements on the digital hardware makers behalf?