Raw file conversion do you see a significant difference?

I find I have a standardised approach to workflow but every now and then I play around with the camera profile settings. In the main I use Adobe standard when using ACR and when I use DPP I use Camera standard. A few years ago I always used Camera standard in ACR but I was persuaded that Adobe was likely to be more accurate or realistic. I attach three images that were processed using my standard approach using the same raw file so I have not set out to make one image any better or worse than another. I have not done anything in Photoshop other than sharpen. I deliberately did not retouch the eye either. They were all sharpened using the same regime and the images were all cropped to the same size prior to sharpening. The only difference between the images is the raw conversion. Do you see a significant difference, which one do you prefer. I won't say any more or ask further questions as I do not wish to introduce any bias.
Image order is B, A, C

If I understand you correctly, the only difference in the processing is the choice of “Camera profile” in ACR?

In my experience, the “which is better” question will vary by image and by your vision for the end result. There can be even more pronounced differences than you can see here based on the choice of “Camera profile” as it can affect everything from basic color rendering to shadow and highlight detail. If I’m going to process an image with ACR, the first thing I do is check out all of the choices for “Camera profile” and pick the one that gets me to a starting point which is closest to what I want for the finished image. If I am not that happy with any of them, I may then do the same in DPP as that will yield another set of possibly very different effects than ACR.

I see a lot of difference between no. 1 and the rest, and not so much between no. 2 and 3. I prefer no.1, main reasons being: 1) the highlights in the BG are more toned down, creating better separation of subject and BG; 2) colors on the feathers and legs seem slightly more vivid; 3) I like the sharpness, which seems less 'agressive' (i.e. sharp where it needs to be sharp, soft where it needs to be soft, if that makes sense) than in the other images.
But, as Mike rightly remarks, I'm not sure what the original situation looked like and which image comes closest to that or what you envisioned making the photo.

I'm not exactly sure what you're asking, or what the differences are in these files -- just the choice of the profile? There will definitely be differences with the choice of camera profile, and, as Mike said, choose the one that gives you the best starting point. Everything should be tweaked in every raw file.

Unfortunately, for many images Adobe Standard will give reds/yellows that are too saturated, at least with Canons. (I've heard with Nikon the bias is toward greens and blues, but I don't know.) Starting with a file where reds are too saturated, and going to the Main section and reducing saturation, is not the way to go. Start with a profile that preserves detail and increase the colors individually as needed.

The profiles are mostly about color. Any differences in tonalities will be minor and well within the tweaking you should be doing anyway.

So to your question: I can't tell without seeing the raw file at 100%, but from what I can see here it looks like the oranges are too saturated (without enough detail) in the first image, so I assume it is Adobe Standard, which would not be a good choice for this image. (It may be the best choice for many others.) It may make the feathers more vivid, but at the expense of the legs. If you start with colors underdone, they can be cranked up. If overdone, they are not so easy to reduce. And you might want to deal with the feathers and legs separately.

The tonal differences in the highlights are so minor they can be dealt with by small tweaks in the sliders in the Basic section.

Hi Jonathan, I see a difference in each image as to which is better I think all three are good starting points to process the image but if I had to choose i think I would start with the middle one. Much like Mike and Diane I use the camera profile tab as another creative choice in my processing workflow often toggling between profiles to see which one gets me close to how i want the image to look, there really is no set profile that I work with as each applies a different tonal curve, color rendition, and white balance interpretation of the Raw data.

Thanks very much for you interest and comments. I think we are all singing pretty much from the same hymn sheet when it comes to choosing camera profiles. The end result is the one that counts it just the starting point which may require consideration. I have to be honest I usually forget about camera profiles and stay with one until I get a problem and then more often than not something on this website prompts me to take another look.

I would take all three as acceptable, I think it is only when you take a good look and compare one to the other that you notice and consider the slight differences.
I was just curious to see if anyone had any strong preferences on the images shown it would have provided me with more food for thought.
Thanks very much once again for taking a look.

Just for your interest the images presented in order were processed as follows. All were treated identically in CS6.

B DPP Camera standard (first image)
A ACR Adobe Standard (second image)
C ACR Canon camera standard (third image)