^^No I am not arguing that it won't be truer to life. What I'm saying is, I think there is value in the imperfections. I think there is value in the graininess of real film, and the differences in grain from scene to scene and when they change camera angles. not because it was contrived or added later, but because they were using analog methods.

I think the mona lisa in 2012 would be truer to life (just take her picture!) but what artistic value would it have?

There is beauty in craftsmanship. There is beauty in things that were hand crafted by people with talent and skill. Did you know that Douglas Slacombe never used a light meter on raiders of the lost ark? Just held up his index finger to the sun. Raiders would not look nearly as good today because those idiosynchratisies would be gone, and to put them in again artificially becomes a contrivance.