The short answer, in my oppinion, to this question is a solid no, because what makes photography difficult is having an artistic vision and creative ideas, rather than the choise recording medium or the equipment associated with it.

Many would most likely try to compare the pros and cons between the two mediums and try to figure out how well the outcome would fit their needs, but I’d like to go one step beyond and argue that technique is not the central problem that determines the true level of difficulty.

Instead, the underlying challenge with either kind of photography is what to photograph. How to do that is secondary. The technique follows the vision. What matter does it make whether you choose film or digital if you don’t know what to shoot?

Some could argue that film cameras tends to be more difficult, because they are older and (mostly) lack the technology and automation that we take for granted today. Digital cameras may have the advantage of immediacy, but you’re still facing the decision where to point the camera and having to come up with ideas and points of view. After all, cameras don’t take the photos. You take them.

I’d also like to make the point of saying that film is more unforgiving, leaving you face to face with your own mistakes. The learning curve is streeper, because it demands a different kind of dicipline. It may be only seemingly harder, but it’s perhaps a bit more rewarding and superior as a teacher compared to digital.