Well, it doesn't really annoy me but my face usually draws a grin.
It's amusing when someone goes wrong on the film type and color. Tri-X frame and a color shot, or as the example in the thread; provia on B&W...
A few months ago I remember to have seen something that looked like an authentic film shot on a clothes shop. It was square. Had edge markings of TX 320 and had a bit of grain.
In the TV, there's a humor show about politicians. There is a section where they play a gag of the past year. The video is shown inside a film frame of Kodak GC400, though modified, it's seen something like "Koikad GC400". I wonder if MP has the Still film markings.
Now, I hope that I won't open the can of worms...
What annoys me are the attacks of some digi people against the film community; specially if they are so ignoramus about it.
I was browsing around, and found a review of a plustek 35mm scanner, now, this is the starting paragraph:
Over the past decade digital cameras have almost completely replaced film cameras for day-to-day photography. Although there are some professionals still using film for large format photography and other specialist applications, in the consumer market only a handful of die-hard Luddites are still clinging to what is now a largely obsolete technology. Digital photography has many overwhelming advantages; the cameras are smaller, more convenient and are generally easier to use, you can see the results instantly, delete unwanted images and store hundreds of high-quality photographs on a memory card the size of your thumbnail. Also despite what the Luddites may tell you a good digital camera can beat most film cameras on image quality.
So, people who aren't pros using LF systems are luddites... These kind of people are who popularize a negative idea of film.