Uh, nobody said "free" except you in your sarcastic look from a film-shooting POV. Let's look at some current prices, shall we? Some real numbers, not just B.S., okay? Let's shoot 1,000 frames, shall we? Let's price it out, okay?
E200 135-36 Ektachrome Professional ISO 200 $9.95
35mm 36 exposure E-6 slide develop and mount $10.00
1,000 divided by 36 equals 27.7777 rolls. Let's call it 28 rolls, for a total of 1,008 frames with film. 28 rolls of professional slide film costs $278.60 to buy at $9.95 per 36 shot roll, with no shipping costs, no gasoline costs, no travel costs. Processing at $10.00 per 36 exposure roll of slides will run $280.00. So, film cost and developing cost for 1,008 35mm slides is $558.60. That is a little bit over 55 and four-tenth cents PER SHOT with a 35mm film camera.
So, for the cost of a low-end Nikon D40x AND a Nikkor 18-55mm lens, you can shoot and develop 28 rolls of E-6 slide film. Oh, but if you need to pay shipping on the film, add in extra money. And how much money and time will it cost to make all the trips to and from the lab to drop off film, drive home, then drive back,pick up the film, and drive back home? How about when only a few frames are needed? With film, you can shoot 1 frame or 36 frames and the slide developing cost is basically the same. If only 12 exposures are needed on a 36 shot roll , the cost will still be the same for the film and the developing: $19.95 total for the roll of film and the developing and mounting cost; hey, only $1.66 per frame when you need to shoot 12 frames!!! Film is such a great deal!
(Oh, did you want to shoot 200 ISO slide film at 400 ISO? Add the lab's Push/Pull fee of $3.75 per roll)
I bought a FujiFilm S2 Pro d-slr body a number of years ago, and it has shot the equivalent of over $80,000 worth of film and processing. And the camera STILL functions. Cost savings just to create the images, compared with film? $77,501. Sure, there were hard drives that had to be bought to archive the images, and DVD discs to back up the images as well. But nowhere near $77,501 worth of media is or was needed to archive that many digital images. The slide mounting pages, notebooks,and cabinets to house 143,000 35mm mounted slides would probably cost $10,000 quite easily.
So, one single d-slr body that created roughly 143,000 images, shot over four years, at a cost of $2,499 for the camera; a camera that in today's marketplace, could be purchased new for only $500 or so, due to the huge drop in d-slr prices since 2002. A D40x is easily the equivalent of the S2Pro.
A Canon 7D or Nikon D300s is easily,easily a vastly superior camera.
Yeah, film is economical compared to digital capture. Sure. Right. Oh, and if you want to push-process some slide film, add that $3.75 surcharge per roll.
Or, you could shoot
short dated C41 film, about $2.00 a roll,
process it in your kitchen sink about $1.60 a roll
Scan and proof (cost depends on what you have, or have access to) worst case is $3.00 to $4.00 for proofs, 4.68 from costco and the like @ .13 each 4x6.
One stop push processing, cost you 30 seconds, no more money. 2 stops, 45 seconds, still no money. Want to play with acceleration? No more money, other than the cost of your B&W developer. Cross processing? costs you no more, in fact it could be less if you find out of date E6 film inexpensively. As an art major, the ability to have that kind of creative control is very powerful. Depending on your creative bent, you can find materials inexpensively, if you are willing to look.
Want to shoot transparencies? Walmart offers send out E6 processing for around $2.00 a roll, far from the $10.00 mentioned above. There are many sources for short dated E6 film as well, I have never paid more than $2.50 a roll for either 35mm or 120 film, either E6 or C41. If it's been refrigerated, and you store it in the freezer, you will be fine. (just ask my wife, we have an entire freezer, just for film. When we get low on a particular type, we buy a few bricks to replace it)
so to summarize, using the same 28 rolls referenced above (assuming you print 50 8x10's at costco for $1.49) :
C41: film cost $70.00; processing $44.80;prints $74.50 for a total $189.00
E6: Film Cost $70.00; processing (walmart)$56.00 for a total of $126.00
As an aside, E6 film is the worst film to shoot when starting out, with very limited dynamic range, the extreme exposure accuracy needed and limited printing options (Ciba is just too damn expensive these days, leaving scan and print, or internegatives)
After proofing, you can decide which prints to actually print, either yourself or go to costco/wally world and pay around $1 for an 8x10. (I prefer using the studio's Frontier for scan, proof and printing, as it cost me $0).
Add to the cost the camera of your choice, I have used F3's for years, an F3/MD4 combo is about $200, add a couple of mid range AI lenses for a hundred or so each and you are still far and away ahead of what you would be shooting digital. Now if you were getting paid for the job and needed fresh, color matched rolls, then yes, $10 a roll is fine, as you typically expense film and processing costs anyway. (or you should be directly or indirectly.)
This is just my opinion, I shoot both and still find film to be less expensive, even at 10 exposures per roll on 120 film. The key is having a clear vision of what you want before you shoot, as well as having the skill and familiarity with your equipment to make it so.
Some do, some don't. Without exception, every one of my fellow students will wander around an object shooting away, then decide later. I prefer to wander around, find the viewpoint I prefer or have envisioned, shoot one or two exposures and move on.