Very sweet. Rather overexposed, but that’s very easy to do with transparent materials … in classical photography or in CG.
Let’s talk studio photography for a sec. When you are lighting glass, what you want is the suggestion of transparency. Otherwise, you light it just like it was an opaque object. So the most important lights are the ones in the front; not the one in the back. As long as you can see some light “through” the material, it will look like glass. But otherwise all of the definition, everything that will make it look 3-D and not flat, comes from the front. It’s ideal if you can arrange for the light which shines “through” the object to come from the rear side, say ten o’clock or two o’clock, so that no light goes straight into the lens.
Specular highlights on the front of the object are absolutely critical. (And almost completely missing here.)
The backdrop, in particular, needs to be fairly contrasty but not strongly-lit. It’s almost impossible to nail a shot where the backdrop emits light from behind. A velour or similar material works very well.
You’ve got a very nice model of glass roses. The lighting situation is what’s difficult. You can make it easier, and make the shot better.
What’s hurting the shot right now, imho, is a natural loss (or diminishing) of the “3D illusion.” The brightness levels of the background begin to match those of the object.