Another vote for that second shot James, beautiful! Not that I'm going to take up smoking but is that a real statistic about pipe smokers living longer?
Thanks all. The second one is more of a 'true color' example. The others are a bit cool. I might re-scan and see if I can get a more appealing palette.
Bryan, it is an actual result of a study conducted by the Surgeon General. Non-inhaling pipe smokers did not have a significantly higher occurrence of cancer and they lived about 4 years longer than those who don't smoke at all. I think it has more to do with the deliberate practice of relaxation than it does with the smoking. That's why I would be curious about longevity in the slower-paced, contemplative film shooter compared to the frenetic digital shooter poring over thousands of almost identical images to find the 'perfect' one. I know that I am a wreck after a week of looking through digital wedding photos, sorting out the truly awful from the "keepers". On the other hand, I just developed and scanned 3 rolls and 4 sheets last weekend and am enjoying looking at each one. They are all so different. Not every one is a wall-hanger, but they are all fun to look at. Same with taking film photos. The Zorki/Fed experience is completely different than the Nikon and I slow down and go through the ritual of finding exposure, composing, looking again, recomposing, taking the photo, winding the film... you know, the whole thing. It is an enjoyable process. Pipe smoking is similar. You choose a tobacco, choose a pipe, load it, light it, tamp it down, light it again, puff, savor the earthy flavors... It isn't a nicotine delivery system like cigarettes, so pipe smokers aren't necessarily addicted. I will smoke for a few months then put it down for a few months to a year.
So in a very long-winded answer to your simple question, I think the stat is believable and probably, the same could be said about any hobby that is an intentional effort to relax.
