Nothing about the experience of developing film sounds interesting to me.
Would you mind sharing other subtle nuances of shoot on film vs digital?
With film you have to supplement a lot of what's achievable in digital via guessing and checking with careful thought. You also have many fewer opportunities to get the shot right before you exhaust your film and probably blow the moment replacing it.
This makes film into a forcing function to perform excellent technique and to pre-visualize your shot. This creates better technique.
It's also nice that film has a very high effective resolution (when drum scanned), that film grain is a favorable aesthetic right now (it was usually considered ugly before digital), and that film has a logarithmic response to light meaning that it can handle a wider dynamic range than digital.
On the other hand, scientific imaging is definitely something where non-emotional performance matters and I doubt people use film for any kind of scientific work these days.
Not sure if that situation still exists in DV but for digital photography that stopped being true a long time ago (the balance started shifting almost 10 years ago), most digital sensors support more stops than even the best brands of film.
That said, subjectively I still feel that way. It might have something to do with digital noise and how the experience of actually witnessing different exposures feels between the two media.
I see a lot of photographers starting out not learning the craft. Some of the convenience of digital can reinforce bad habits. You can shoot a thousand photos in a few minutes, switching between a bunch of modes and options that you don't truly understand, and inevitably get a few decent photos. This isn't a fault of digital, it's just human behavior. I think for this reason, a lot of schools are still using film when teaching photography.
As an artist, I have a use for both digital and film photography. There's something about the way film feels, and the way the process of shooting film makes me feel, that makes me enjoy it so much more. My old Pentax cameras are very substantial, physical objects. The shutter opens and closes, and you can feel it - it's a physical act. Digital cameras don't have the same physicality about them. I still use both digital and film, they each have their own advantages to me and have their place.
Darkroom work was rewarding in its own way (for B&W). But, honestly, it was always a means to an end. I knew people who would spend all day making the perfect print. I never had that kind of patience.
I'm not one for strong opinions either way, I think there's a place for film photography and also for digital, and I like both.