I'm having a hard time figuring out where the light is coming from. Seems to be in front of him, though the window is behind him. Of course the face is dark, which would be in keeping with back lighting. Still, the light, which is reflected on the far wall (window reflection) does not seem to be shining toward the subject to back light him. Enough on that. I like the amount of darkness in your original. The second edit goes too far in my opinion. In the last edit where the face is lighter, he appears to be annoyed or pissed off. In the original he is ominous and that works for me. I think it is a very effective photo that is quite thought provoking. Good effort.
Erich

As is my usual practice, I write a critique based on my perception of the original posted image. Then, I read through the previous critiques. In doing so, in this case, I see a lot of re-works of the image by various people. However, I saw no indication that any permission was requested to do so. This isn't an exercise of how would you do it, it is a consideration and critique section.

Yes, some post a "my image your look" post, which permits members to feel freely creative in re-working an image. In posts, such as this one, a critique is all that was implied. Re-working someone's image under this particular circumstance is, especially when one member asserts, “There is no need for "permission". It's part of what is known as "Fair Use" in copyright law is simply gauche, rude, and unacceptable. That crap may hold up in a court of law, but within a seemingly civilized group of peers, it would seem respectful to refrain from re-working an image to show how YOU would do it.

I say we respect the artist's submission, as is, offer a critique, and leave it at that. Otherwise, ask permission to accompany a critique related illustration, if one is needed.
--Bob