There are some fine art photographers using digital, but especially in the USA, it’s not got the foothold that it has in other areas. I think it’s because of the longevity of the medium, the value of attaching a negative to a camera and a photographer. It’s to do with the provenance of the image.
Heather's comments about the grain of film photography is one I agree with. Even though I use digital, I do like to rough the images up by running them through some filters in Photosop. I tend to use Alien Skin’s Exposure, because I like the results. I can not say whether the GAFF filter is 100% accurate or true to the original film stock, but I like the effect. Much to my sister’s annoyance, I’ll happily “ruin” my crisp digital images by doing things to them in Photoshop. The RAW file is my negative, and I learned very quickly at uni that the negative is the start - you can do all kinds of things in a dark room. Photoshop is no different in this respect.