I'll admit I don't know nearly as much about video as I do audio, but I was under the impression that film grain was generally too small to see in standard definition. The 'grain' in the GOUT has always looked like video noise to me, it doesn't seem like it belongs there. And even if it is actual grain, isn't it more likely to be excessive dupe grain owing to the films having been copied and transferred so many times? Also that kind of noise wreaks havoc with mpeg image encoding, causing compression artefacts even at high bitrates. Just going by those screenshots, the Editdroid does seem slightly sharper, but might even be the same kind of illusion caused by turning the sharpness control up on a tv set--it adds stronger edges throughout, fooling the eye into thinking there is more detail when there actually is not. Turn up the sharpness too far and the picture takes on a fake and hideous appearance, but at moderate levels it could cause what's being seen here. The description of the Editdroid, strange as it is, does say that the fine detail was sharpened artificially, does it not?

I'm not any kind of expert, but that's how it strikes me, looking at them together. Even if the G-Force version is slightly softer, the application of anti-aliasing outweighs it for me, because the GOUT's jaggies are fairly horrific, and the difference is clearly evident on the droids in those screenshots.

I have nothing against film grain, and I like seeing it when it belongs there, but the GOUT's resolution is too low to reveal 'real' grain in my opinion, while its image noise is thick enough to be apparent even on a 12-inch screen. That said, it's quite possible that the G-Force script removed a bit too much, and that a lesser approach to the grain reduction could give more pleasing results.