Well, I believe this is HDR with water (and a real one, i.e. one of at least three successive exposures, auto-bracketed), and if a wind was rippling the water, it just CAN NOT have remained in the same place as where it was during the first and where it would be for the third expose, even if those were only fractions of seconds apart. Which - so I think - accounts for the aspect of "blurriness" (motion) in the water at the front, which, so I think personally, gives this photo an extra, something special, something capturing, as I have rarely seen before. So to me, this photo is not just bad quality. To the contrary: it is very well thought out, planned, composed, exposed and merged (I would think). And after all that (so I feel) something was additionally done to it to give it the dreamlike effect it has.
If the photo author felt that only these intense colours, the high dynamic range and the soft dreaminess represent how he felt when he was in those gardens, then I find it all justified. And I don't see any justification in publicly trampling on a work like this one.