Por lo visto el problema con las películas de Nolan en UHD en cuanto a nitidez y definición es que el escaneado a 4K no se ha hecho del negativo original, como es costumbre y política de Warner, sino de un interpositivo, por petición expresa del director. Tampoco las películas del director pasan por un Digital Intermediate.


En los foros de blu ray.com lo explican mejor que yo:

Dunkirk looks amazing on the format. The contemporary fare will look good on 4K as it's built into the post-production pipeline.

Phantom Thread is also contemporary.




Not sure I follow. Nolan never uses a DI so the "post-production pipeline" is neither here nor there, Dunkirk looks like it does because it was entirely shot on large format, either 5-perf 65mm for the dialogue scenes or full 15-perf IMAX (did they use some VistaVision as well? can't remember). But something like Begins is 35mm anamorphic, shot with Nolan and Pfister's usual soft-ass look, and even though it got a brand new transfer using a workflow contemporary to what Dunkirk had (transfer from IP) it's not going to look anything like as clean as that. Or Phantom Thread, for reasons which will hopefully become clear.




Which does beg the question: Paul Thomas Anderson is just as celluloid-obsessed as Nolan is, yet his films on home media look spectacular, Phantom Thread on 4K, in particular. What’s his method?


Anderson's method is that he uses the goddamned negative for the transfer, as would any sane person, but Nolan prefers IPs (remember, Nolan doesn't like discrete subwoofer channels either). An IP is only one generation away but it cuts down on the MTF, reducing the high frequency response and making the grain look noisier and blotchier, it's not a major problem for large format but when it comes to 35mm then 4K HDR may not be so kind to it. If anything I think that the HDR has set off that coarser IP grain so much that Nolan felt compelled to reduce it for these transfers.