Just to be awkward (why change the habits of a lifetime) I think somewhere between those those two options would work best for me.
With the first image, you can have your subject closer to the image edge than with the previous Commute photo because you have a clear area towards the top. She is heading towards the light. But cropping away part of the right side and going to something like a 4 x 5 ratio would appear to give added height to the scene.
Showing one more step at the bottom may be open to argument but I don't think you need more than two steps because you have so much clear space at the top to create a balance.
In my view, the first image is the stronger of the two, but both share the same weakness; large areas of bright white (actually the value seems to be 254, so a very, very light gray). It's very bright and draws our eye, but there is absolutely nothing there of interest.
I am not a fan of images where there are no highlight or shadow details.
I like the feeling of isolation in the second image, but like Manfred, the eye is drawn to the blown out section at the top of the image, only to find nothing.
Thanks everyone for giving me comments.
This photo needs one more things such as more details or subjects.
I keep mind your comments.
Not so much. The problem with this image is the way the human visual system works. Our eyes / brain notice the brightest or highest contrast part of the image. When that occurs at the edge of the frame, it draws us out of the shot. There is a high contrast between the subject and the bright part of the image, but the bright area is so bright that this is where we are drawn and it takes some effort to bring our eyes back to explore the rest of the image.
This is a high dynamic range image and these types of scenes are challenging to manage.
In many ways I rather like the idea of her walking from the dark towards the light; but there is too much light. Particularly that diagonal streak on the left side.