Or even better, curves to add contrast and a tweak with Channel Mixer. I think the whites just need to be a bit whiter and the blacks a bit more black. :)

may I suggest that the white balance, or perhaps the exposure seems to be a bit off kilter. Otherwise the image has a nice air of mystery.

One thing about digital, of course, is that photos are basically free. No film to buy or process, so you can experiment to your hearts content. If you read the exif data you can learn a lot this way by seeing what works and what does not. Take a series of shots metering in various ways, read the results when you get home.

Sorry about that, I did not mean to pre-empt your reply. When using film, getting it right in the camera was all important, but we now have the tools to do the improvements post capture. This is a personal choice and many will agree with not cloning, others will be for it. neither is the whole answer. We know that double imaging and dodging and burning were a printers art when printing fr ...

In the above image, if I may be as bold, I would suggest cloning away the overhanging leaves in the sky. I think the image, which is good, would be much improved by this small adjustment.

It depends if you are trying to preserve the highlights, or reveal the shadow detail. Most digital cameras have insufficient dynamic range to encompass both ends, so it is a choice between one or the other. Normally, it is possible to reveal detail in blocked up shadows using photoshop, but impossible to recover any detail in blown highlights. 255 is white and that is that! :x If you expos ...