Good stuff, I thought a LUT might help you make the most of the range the sensor has.
Digitap, yes, that is the problem with using standard HDR algorithms, they aren't great for moving images, you get a lot of inconsistency in colour and luminance from frame to frame.
There are algorithms that work well, I can't talk about the ones we developed as they are part of the company's IP, but there are research papers out there if you go looking that contain some very useful math, that applies directly to the problem.
For multi exposure, we have the LEDs at the maximum brightness to expose the densest film areas, all the time (after seeting the brightness mix of R, G & B to suit the particular film stock) and then adjust the duration of the flash to adjust the exposure. The camera shutter is open for exactly the same time for each exposure, it is the duration of the light that changes. With our lighting system this give consistent colour results, but also ensures that the densest areas of the film still have some photons passing through them that make it to the sensor.
The geeks in our photometry division worked it all out and tested it to verify that we get consistent colour throughout, it did mean a particular mix of LEDs, including two different RED LEDs in the mix to get the full spectra coverage and consistency at different light levels. We had to bin LEDs from various manufacturers as well, as the individual LED performance was often way off what was quoted.
Also, a quick note, high CRI value white LEDs often have colour issues when it comes to sensor response. The CRI methodology it annoyingly flawed. CRI is particularly inaccurate in the deep reds, I wish the industry would switch to CQS, which is way more accurate, but it probably won't happen.
For more reading, http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/cqs_rationale_06-10.pdf