Film photography or digital, does shooting on film actually change how you see your subject

[MachineSaint70]

Film photography has enjoyed a genuine resurgence over the past several years, with younger photographers in particular picking up secondhand cameras and rediscovering a process that digital shooting had made largely obsolete for most casual and professional work alike. Advocates for film argue that the limited number of exposures on a roll and the delay before actually seeing the results force a photographer to slow down and think more deliberately about composition and timing, a discipline that unlimited digital shots can make easy to skip entirely.

Digital defenders counter that the instant feedback loop actually teaches photographers faster, since you can immediately see what worked and adjust on the spot rather than waiting days or weeks to discover a roll was badly exposed, and that the technical quality and flexibility digital sensors now offer has genuinely surpassed what most film stocks can produce in the vast majority of real world shooting conditions. Do you think the format itself actually changes the quality of the photography, or is that more of a romantic idea than a genuine technical reality?