Traditional work is always nice. I started digitally coloring upon the realization that I'd never be a real artist but I do still think traditional work looks best, bar none.

I think both digital and traditional each have their own benefits and disadvantages. Real media is cool as you can get a 'master copy, one off', but it can be very expensive and have a rather hard learning curve. Digital starts off as expensive but since you really dont need to buy anything else it's cheaper in the long run. While you don't get a 'one off' it's cool as you can make as many copies as you like and stick them on anything.
Personally I count both mediums as 'real artists', just the tools are different C:

I agree with much of that but so many digital programs are free, such as GIMP, so it's possible it'd really never cost anything. Having used both, it's clear to me how much easier digital art is, even though I'm still rather new at using it, extensively. Admittedly I only use it to color, as I hate doing line work digitally but my traditional coloring often ended up being the systematic ruination of good line work. Nothing really "counts" in digital, you can always redo it, cleanly. I usually urge people not to give me too many compliments on digitally colored work because to me it just seems like I can't really take the credit. By comparison, it's just too much easier for me to take much pride in it.