Like i said over on the DD itself, it's the fact that it's really not a good texture is the problem. I mean, a DD should be useful/creative/interactive/show mastery/ect. but that one does none of those things. Other than for very small scale works such as this one, it's pretty useless. It can't be tiled (knocking out CG possibilities) and isn't well composed (harming its use as a large-scale texture).
The DD was useful, it's a texture, and one that I would use myself. Not that a DD has to be any of those things, DDs are just features of a GM, no more special than something you would feature in your journal.
I'd rather not argue over this texture's usefulness and artistic merit, because it's all based on opinion, really. There isn't much of a use complaining over it, though, because it's really the GM's choice and opinion on the matter.
Art is subjective, and when I don't approve of a DD, I find it's best to ignore it and move on. After all, it's only there for a mere 24 hours.
While i agree that art is subjective, there are some professional standards. I typically don't comment on paintings or drawings that i object to, but a texture is meant to be a tool. If it isn't well-made, there is a much more objective criteria, being that it is meant as a tool, like a brush or filter.
However, i do respect your position, and i'm glad that you're not as combative as many of the other's i've encountered tonight.