Johnboy3434 said:

zombie84 said:

But why should your preference dictate how everyone sees it, or how the art, irrespective of ANYONE'S preference, should be presented.

That road runs both ways. Why should I be forced to look at those unsightly brush strokes and grainy pictures just because "they need no improvement". And there's a obvious difference between editing the presentation of a piece of art (removing grain and brushstrokes) and editing the content of it (adding Pikachu to Laurence of Arabia).

If film grain didn't exist then films wouldn't exist, it is entirely necessary to the process, it is the grain that makes up the detail of the picture, any attempt to remove film grain will remove details of the image you are trying to look at. By removing the "unsightly grain" to try and see what is behind it you are infact destroying the image you're trying to see and will not be able to see it so clearly.

There are two sides to this, you are asking for things to be changed from the way the cinamatographer intended, we are asking to see a faithful reproduction of what they intended. The cinematographer is fully aware of the grain and would have picked his film stock and shot the film knowing that it would be present, and knowing how it would look at the end and that's what I would like to see preserved.

If it bothers you that much just turn down the sharpness on your TV and blur out the grain, but don't ask that we should have to suffer along with you.