Analog film photography and cameras

It's hard to get away from analogue sytems producing grain of random shapes and sizes and digital systems producing regular pixels. Does it follow that the only genuine grain comes from film negative / wet printing and can only be influenced by choice of chemicals, not 'added' later?

Once the digital resolution becomes greater than that of the viewing process I suspect the whole debate becomes moot, with personal preference and opinion carrying more weight than technical arguement.

Lets not start this.

But if we must, I believe there's a difference between genuine grain and legitimate grain. Or in other words, grain added digitally (to a digital image) might not be genuine but is just as legitimate as the grain you choose to bring out in a negative by your choice of developer.

The same people will berate you for adding grain to a digital image in post but sing the praises of developers like R09 etc for the grain they bring out which to me, is pretty hypocritical.