Just the other day a person here was going on extended rants about how shooting film is allegedly creating more character for the film because of the presence of grain. They were corrected by people who actually know about film, and explained that grain is an unintended byproduct of the process of using film, and if ideal conditions are maintained throughout the production and transport and exhibition of the film, little to no grain will ever be visible.

And I still defend film grain. No matter how many times you people call it "unintended by-product" or "flaw", it doesn't change the fact film grain can be used as stylistic device and it does help with arhmosphere or, yes, to give film "character". Phantom Thread and Carol are great examples of modern films that have very visible grain and that most people would agree look absolutely gorgeous. Are you now going to blame that Haynes and PTA just had that visible grain as "unintended byproduct" because they didn't maintain "ideal conditions"?