And the dominoes continue to fall...

Cinematographer Roger Deakins Switching From Film to Digital Camera - The Hollywood Reporter (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/cinematographer-roger-deakins-switching-film-178661)

“No Country for Old Men” was a wonderful and powerful film and one of his best.

I'm sure Roger will produce great movies with his digital Arri as he did with the previous film version...it is after all, the subject matter of each film that is the most important. Roger's choice was no doubt swayed mainly by the fact that it will make it far cheaper to produce in digital and help remain within budget without the inherent problems of wasted film spools.

I don't think the cost of film stock was a factor, it's a small percentage of the budget of a major feature film, it would be more he likes the look of the Alexa compared to current film stocks.

There is no doubt that he likes the 'look' of the latest digital or he wouldn't have begun to use it in the first place...

But without a doubt, overall budget and ease of workflow, especially post editing were deciding factors that helped sway his opinions.

According to 24 DP, Rodney Charters, all US dramatic TV production has switched from film to digital with the exception of Glee. He had no idea what reason Glee had for staying with film.

Charters was speaking at the Canon booth at NAB.

After his talk, I asked for his advice to my son who has just moved to LA to get into the industry. His response (in his signature Kiwi accent) was, "Be pleasant as hell and work your ass off because there are ten people behind you who want your job." ;)

But without a doubt, overall budget and ease of workflow, especially post editing were deciding factors that helped sway his opinions.

I don't think that would worry him too much, film's workflow is well established and tapeless does introduce its own problems to the camera department like needing back up copies and the checking the data for errors. He'll probably be shooting on ArriRAW, which isn't the same as a traditional video format workflow, but an uncompressed Bayer output from the sensor.

If the images didn't satisfy him, the factors you mention wouldn't even be a consideration. They're not his problem anyway, his name is build on the images and he's found a digital camera that gives what he wants. This may or may not keep the producer happy.

Other top DPs may have totally different opinions and want to use 65mm film and has a director who also wants to go that route in their feature film. TV drama s much more budget driven in this regard than high end features

TV drama s much more budget driven in this regard than high end features

Wasn't there some SAG agreement which made the actors' fees cheaper if shooting on "video" and this helped swing many producers? I remember reading that but maybe someone can confirm it?

Maybe the kids on Glee are cheap enough anyway! :)

Digital has recently surpassed film, in low light sensitivity. This is a very important cost saving factor, for a number of productions, especially those heading for TV.