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?