I don't think it's a film vs. digital thing. I just don't see why anyone would want 1000+ images from their wedding regardless of the medium used. 100 would be plenty.
It just seems that because the digital shooters can shoot a lot more, they do and therefore it is now expected, making more unnecessary work for everyone.
This becomes a business plan and marketing question session; "is that what I want to be known for?" and "can I really afford to do all the marketing and pay all the bills if that is what I sell?"
For me the answers are no and no.
I fully expect video and "Aunt Linda" to completely take over that market eventually.
I do think the pricing models are changing to accommodate the idea of giving away the negs though.
Getting paid properly upfront for shooting is one way to take after-the-fact print profits out of the calculation.
Timing is another, delivering the negs after say, a year. If I haven't made the print sales in a few months I'm probably done chasing that client, deliver the negs on "their" first anniversary and ask for referrals instead.
A third option is being a great printer. If your printing can stand on it's own as a salable product you become very hard to replace regardless of who has the negative.
So while our B&G's won't need or buy 1000 prints. They enjoy what can be done for slideshows.
Here's an engagement slideshow I did last year with a couple when I was shooting nearly 100% digital:
I think wedding photographers, just for fun and to see what happens, should try this. Instead of placing disposable cameras on the table as some brides do, carry a couple of Holgas in their pocket as well as the second shooter to see what they come up with. Who knows, can't hurt.
I have several friends in that business and once in a while I used to second shoot for them, some years ago, it's a shame what is happening. Most say it's the increased flood into the market place with new photographers offering $500 shoots on craigslist etc., that is killing them. But interesting, the top 5 percent of the famous wedding photographers are doing their best business right now, almost like their clients are proving the seperation of the Classes between richer and poorer.
Anyway, digital or film, I don't like to see anyone hurting.
Slow slide shows are considered "hokey" today and the technology to replace them is in my wife's D90.
I imagine that in a few years it will be hard to find a self respecting soccer mom without video capability. If mom can do a high quality movie clip it raises the bar for digital shooters who are making slide shows.
Throw in the "Red" cameras at 10mp per frame and video is poised to put digital stills at weddings out of business.
The shooters of $500 shoot and burn jobs aren't the problem either in my mind, the $500 buyers are, that's all they are willing to spend because that's all they have or that's all it's worth to them.
$500 for 3-4 hours shooting and no processing is a reasonable day rate for a new shooter actually. $125/hr.