It's quite alright. The water droplets are good ones. Images like this are popular on stock photo sites, and this is a pretty "straight" rendering of this subject matter. On a technical level, the color fringing around the white petals hurts it a bit compared to say, an image shot with a really good macro lens, but then again, it's a "real" image, not a highly-perfected Stock image bank type of photo. Overall, the technical quality and the image "look" looks like it comes from a lens or lens + closeup filter or something that is not quite right for this sort of photography; the petals seem almost to vibrate, due to the way the lens system images or "draws".
I wish it had a bit more space around the petals. Not a lot more, but just a little bit more space.
We are at a stage in the history of photography where images are so,so commonplace and so plentiful, and stock images of things like this are so commonplace that I think the standards we use to judge have changed a LOT from where they were say 30 years ago; before massive software manipulation and automatic CA removal and all that were possible, this image would have been, relatively better than it is now. Are we jaded? Yes, maybe so. I don't want to seem to be dissing your picture--it is quite alright. But today there are hordes of people making similar images using the best of everything--lens,camera,software,lighting. How do we judge?
Ha told you! I laughed when I saw your AsterCopycat!
You really nailed the WB!
But not only are you a bit shy on the DOF (as you admit), you've got a lot of CA on the tips of the petals.
Thanks WGI generally agree with what Derrel has said, so I won't repeat it. My only other nit is the big "drop" of water in the middle of the flower. It just does not look natural to me, but then maybe that is just me - don't know.