Raj, here is my take - The detail less overexposed flowers gives uniqueness/freshness to the frame. The reverse vignetting looks a bit obvious in my view. Leaving aside these photographic attributes, I would love to hear your thoughts on the image.

When a viewer sees a picture and connects it becomes his picture. He sees a part of his experience, part of himself ( or herself of course ) , his childhood, his dreams in that picture. He makes that picture his own. I think the more the opportunity to do this the better the art. It for me clarifies why a sharp picture of bee eater is not high art. (IMHO viewer still experiences ) . If I had taken it i still see myself as a part part of it. I remember how I trekked km to make the pic. So it gives memories of my joy like art. But for others they do not experience themselves in the picture.

With this thought this pic is an attempt. I am inviting the viewer to fill the flower with his own favorite color and make the picture his own. gives him space to imagine the flower and go back to the experience. May be even recall the fragrance.


Talking of space for the viewer to imagine. Another thought I had was. Why should we see the world in the forced rectangular space just because the sensor is so shaped. So in some sense I tried to make the flowers like a cutout of irregular frame. To enhance that feeling I blurred out the outer rectangular frame . Sorry too much theory. But these were my thoughts as I made this.
Thanks Ganesh for taking the time and commenting.

Raj, here is short snippet of video on "The Psychology of Aesthetics". The presenter (Art Shimamura) tried to characterize the processes of assimilation of work of art and talk about I-SKE model. Novelty part of it is one of the component which probably is easier to achieve. The emotional connection is a challenge that we all need to focus on. I kind of liked the "Wundt Curve" discussed here. Interesting observation there is about extreme end of the novelty ! Hope this video snippet makes sense in this context.