Judging
A public rubric, applied to blind work.
Every juried competition uses the same 100-point rubric. Event rules affect eligibility, not image quality scores.
Standard 100-point rubric
Version 2026.1
Judges score the image itself out of 100. Equipment, experience, integration time, location, weather, and membership tier never multiply or otherwise alter the score.
| Criterion | Points | What judges assess | Score anchors |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technical execution | 30 | Focus, tracking, calibration, star shape, registration, and visible capture or processing artifacts. | 27–30 exceptional · 21–26 strong · 13–20 developing · 0–12 major technical problems |
| Processing quality | 25 | Noise control, gradients, color balance, transitions, restraint, and artifact handling. | 23–25 exceptional · 18–22 strong · 11–17 developing · 0–10 major processing problems |
| Composition and framing | 20 | Framing, balance, orientation, scale, negative space, and visual structure. | 18–20 exceptional · 14–17 strong · 9–13 developing · 0–8 weak or distracting |
| Signal recovery | 15 | Meaningful detail, tonal range, and faint structure that are supported by the captured data. | 14–15 exceptional · 11–13 strong · 7–10 developing · 0–6 limited or unsupported |
| Artistic interpretation | 10 | A coherent, intentional treatment that supports the subject without overriding data integrity. | 9–10 exceptional · 7–8 strong · 4–6 developing · 0–3 incoherent or distracting |
| Total | 100 | Whole-number scores only; every criterion is required. | |
Ties are broken deterministically by the higher average in this order: technical execution, processing quality, composition, signal recovery, artistic interpretation, then earlier entry submission. Judges see blind entry evidence only after declaring no conflict.
How blind review works
- Assignment: judges receive a blind entry and deadline.
- Conflict check: evidence unlocks only after a no-conflict declaration.
- Scoring: judges submit all five rubric scores and private rationale.
- Ranking: averages and published tie-breaks determine placement.
- Publication: identities and results appear on the scheduled results date.
What LumaMerit expects from judges
- Technical breadth and clear, respectful scoring.
- Calibration before activation and periodically afterward.
- Prompt conflict disclosure and confidentiality.
- Consistent use of published anchors across styles and equipment.
- Multi-factor authentication for judging work.
Approval begins calibration; it does not immediately grant live assignments.