Judging
A public rubric, applied to blind work.
Every juried competition uses the same published 100-point foundation. Competition-specific rules determine eligibility; they do not change the quality score.
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: active judges receive an entry title and deadline, without the entrant’s identity or account information.
- Conflict declaration: evidence stays locked until the judge declares no personal, financial, club, brand, or close professional conflict.
- Independent scoring: each judge submits all five rubric values and private rationale before panel aggregation.
- Deterministic ranking: qualifying scores are averaged and ties follow the published criterion order—never popularity or payment.
- Publication: finalized placements disclose the entrant and score only when the competition’s results date arrives.
What AstroLeague expects from judges
- Demonstrated technical breadth and the ability to explain scores respectfully.
- Completion of blind calibration before activation and periodic recalibration afterward.
- Prompt conflict disclosure and confidentiality until results are public.
- Consistent use of the published anchors across equipment, experience, and aesthetic styles.
- A current multi-factor-authenticated session for protected judging work.
Applications are reviewed by staff. Approval begins a calibration stage; it does not immediately grant live assignments.