are among the challenges here.
This was my thinking:
The horizon line formed by the trees had to be dealt with from the beginning of post-processing this image as it would inevitably become the point of greatest contrast. As such, the viewer's eye is likely to go there first.
Then what? If I preserve and/or enhance the foreground too much the viewer's eye might have difficulty being pulled above to the sky or below to the foreground.
Since I prefer the viewer's eye go directly to the tree line/sky interface and then directly up and around the sky, I elected to leave the foreground dark. I incorporated a gradient allowing a bit of foreground detail below so the viewer's eye has someplace else to discover after taking in the sky.
Regarding composition, I could see cropping a bit more off the left side and the bottom.
Regarding color, I darkened the sky a bit and enhanced both contrast and saturation. Still, it is substantially similar to the actual scene as I saw it. Have I pushed the sky beyond the edge of believability? I'd prefer to be right at that line but not over.
I'd appreciate the benefit of other eyes. Thanks in advance for posting your observations and suggestions.