Here are some of my critiques in no particular order: I was expecting very good compositions, artistically speaking. But nothing really caught my eye. There was a tendency to add too much which over-complicated things. In other words, they looked too busy and distracting. However, it seemed like this contributes to a higher score. Keeping it simple would make it look much more visually appealing. Some things just have to go: moss trees. No more moss trees. I'm sick of moss trees. They are so difficult to do right but almost always, they look like moss growing on the tops of twigs. They are also difficult to maintain, and according to the rules, should lose points (but most likely don't.) Photo-editing isn't allowed, but there were many obvious ones. If they can't edit a photo so that it doesn't look edited, just disqualify them. Bad photo editing is distracting and a violation of the rule. If you don't enforce this rule, don't have this rule. I'm tempted to enter an entirely edited photo of a non-existing aquascape just to prove a point. Plant selection was the biggest problem in a lot of arrangements. There seems to be a tendency to use more plants than are necessary. As a result, the plants didn't complement well and contributed to the visual distraction. Also, some arrangements could have used more plants because the hardscape was too noticeable. Last major critique, I know this isn't a photo contest but there were a number of works which would have benefited from skilled photography. Photography is not about taking a photo. Photography is about using and manipulating light. By carefully manipulating light, you create an atmosphere, an impression, a mood. You can also highlight or hide certain features. These can help tell the story of the aquascape and can even contribute to a higher score. Flat lighting, where the entire tank is lit evenly from above, highlights everything. If there are features that are poor, this kind of lighting will make it obvious.