I haven't read this thread very closely, so apologies if I miss the point.
1. sRGB generally uses (edit thanks Walter) a 24-bit color space that represents around 16 millions colors, which is the MAXIMUM of what we can see and which our equipment can display. EVERYTHING ends up in a similar bit-depth, adobe RGB, rec709 etc. All viewable/practical dynamic range is represented by 8-bit channel/24-bit full color data range.
2. RAW is a NON-VISUAL per pixel measurement of light intensity, usually in 14-bits, or 16,343 values that falls on a camera sensor. Each pixel has a color filter placed above it that is used to measure color. Each pixel can only see one color. Neighboring pixel color values are necessary to create a full-color value. This creates a huge barrier to understanding. (8-bit color in sRGB video is a misnomer because it really means 8 bits per channel, when it is really a 24-bit full color value).
When you see the washed-out footage of RAW video you are seeing A LIERAW data can create 4 trillion colors, or dynamic range BEYOND which we can see on our displays, or with our pupils fixed at one size. Therefore,
RAW DATA CANNOT BE SEEN. What you see is a visual proxy. RAW data
could be shown as hyper saturated and then all grading would show going from hyper-saturated to normal saturation. T
he way RAW video is displayed is completely arbitrary. The videos one sees where the person shows the washed-out RAW footage and their grade is amateur hour (sorry, I know it's fun). A "flat-profile" in 8bit video removes saturation (color) for more brightness detail. You can add color back in, but not as well as if you had it in the first place. "Grading" RAW, again, RAW doesn't have any look, gray, washed out, or otherwise.
RAW data must be understood scientifically as the readings of silicon wafers which we must put in visual space, just like x-rays, ultra-violet and other near infrared frequencies. Yes, you can no more "see" RAW video than you can see x-rays.
I wish I had the time to write a better post here.
Anyway, exporting DNGs into Premiere doesn't make sense to me because MLVProducer will create a nice sRGB data set so you don't need to process the RAW files in Premiere. If you are going to use DNGs, Photoshop has better tools for RAW to RGB. Keep in mind a benefit of processing RAW on the computer, vs camera, is you have access to more powerful de-bayering algorithms (the programs that borrow color values from neighboring pixels). The camera might use bicubic for example to save power, where you can run aMaze on your PC, which does a better job.
As for noise at the floor. You have to pick a range of data in RAW to create a real-life sRGB color space. "Noise" is subjective. Converting RAW to something usable is about subjectively representing 42-bits of data (which can't be fully seen) into 24 bits of visual data within our biological dynamic range.
Another way to think of it is that in sRGB you could record someone talking in the park and they look great, but the sky is washed out, as it would be in real life (unless we looks up at the sky and our pupils contracted). Later, you discover there were UFOs in the sky. You can't recover them in the sRGB footage because the sky is washed out (again,
just as it would be in the sky if you tried to look at them in real life and you had just gone to the eye doctor, who gave you something so your pupils couldn't contract). If you had RAW data, you could re-translate the data, "cast" the sky data into an image where you could see the UFO. Of course, the same algorithm would darken out your original subject.
As for s-logs, they are 8-bit
KLUDGES that move the sensitivity of light around in a 24-bit space, AT THE EXPENSE OF COLOR in the place they borrowed data from. Most of the stuff about s-logs and color profiles I see on the Internet is complete cow-dung when it comes to improving dynamic-range. It looks like magic. You try it yourself and you'll see it's just snake oil. S-log has a place, but a VERY LIMITED one, like shooting in a bright sunny day. Again, it does NOT increase absolute dynamic range.
So to answer the question here. If you shoot RAW, don't overthink it. Use MLVProducer (or MLRawViewer, etc.) to get a good 24-bit translation and get on with your life. If you want higher DR in your 8-bit camera s-log is only a LIMITED solution for LIMITED situations which you better understand. If you've seen great 8-bit video from a Canon C100 or Sony FS5 say, then you'll just have to get one
They do in-camera DR translation better than consumer cameras but it has more to do with having s-log. That is, they don't need log profiles to give more natural looking video than consumer cameras.
