I'd say the second one but I didn't like the lighting very much. I think thats just my personal preference though. I liked the first one but there wasn't the effect of the light so no. I didn't like the 3rd one because the blue overcast shadow thing; what you wanna call it, make the light effect look terrible. And I just didn't like the last one.
Number four is a version that fits with the style the painting is in. I like it better than some of the softer versions because she does look deadly there. I don't like the third version because she looks too... well, it's version two with a purpley-grey filter. I don't know, to me it just drains away her beauty.
I like number four but for an artistic piece about beauty probably not. It looks like a detailed panel in a comic book. (Which isn't bad, but not for a stand-alone, I guess...)
Number two had my first reaction be: what is she made of, wax? Because it looks so. So glossy. Her eyes are straddling the fine line of being brought out more and looking exactly like the background. Which makes me look at them more. And then the background... Her hair looks shiny. It feels like she is about to walk into fire and is giving you a backwards glance. After I stare at it for ten seconds I'm liking it more and more.
When I first compared all three I immediately like number one best. I see all the detail, it's not too bright or dark, or contrasty and she is beautiful. After staring ten seconds at number two they become a very close call and I can't decide which one to pick. If I were posting I'd pick number one only because I stick very close to the rule-book and dramatic lighting scares me.