Tiptup said:
Your argument is flawed. It assumes that the lack of grain equals more detail. Grain is a detail in and of itself (that may or may not have aesthetic value). This detail, I believe, works with our brains better than some smooth, supposedly solid image does. It reflects a reality that is statistical and random. Hiding that and making an image smooth and solid is simply a different way to display reality and one that I do not believe is as compatible with the way people think. People intuitively grasp physical reality with some chaos more than they can grasp a physical reality designed to be as simple and controlled as possible (though we may understand the latter more in a simplistic, logical sense, I do not believe it resonates with the whole of our beings to the same degree and would love to see some scientists study this issue).

Essentially, film grain is not something apposed to high resolution, it is another approach to resolution entirely, and one that I believe communicates more real data. As such, digital, electronic images designed to make everything look smooth and solid can be just as identified with "low resolution" as grainy film is. Likewise, grainy film can be identified with high resolution. Film grain is simply a different technique to arrive at a low or high resolution, it is not just low or high in and of itself.

Do you have any studies or professional opinions to back up that assertion from the first paragraph? On a personal level, I find extremely fine-grained pictures to be much more involving, because it feels like there's nothing between me and what's happening on screen (like 3D, but reversed; like I could reach into the film). Higher-grain pictures I find more distracting, because I'm like "Whoa, there's this constantly fluctuating cloud of stuff over my picture!" Granted, that cloud of stuff is the picture, but it wasn't in front of the camera (like the actors), nor does it exist within the construct of the film's story (like effects done in post). In my opinion, something that doesn't meet at least one of those two requirements is something not worth keeping. That's why I don't like grain. I don't expect anyone to agree with me, but can you at least understand where I'm coming from?