This is not meant to be a criticism of human judge... (
Only once did I buckle under "political" pressure and agree to judge. It was the monthly "Photographic Society" meeting, not a big contest.
This was ages ago but the AI Camels Nose was already poking around the edge of the tent. I was given a page listing about a dozen parameters on which to pass judgement. As much as possible all of them should be applied to every entry. AI and a robot eye could really excel at that boring chore !
IIRC there were maybe two parameters, perhaps Creativity and Originality, that could reward the makers of photos that were actually interesting. Acoarst all the members knew that Creativity and Originality combined were worth, at best, about 15% of maximum points. IOW, theres only a rather minor demerit for aggravated boringness.
Quality of Execution, if it were a single item would have been worth, at most, 8%. But it was spread out to cover multiple items such as Lighting, Color, Focus, Exposure, etc etc. Composition was likewise not a single 8% item but was broken into Framing, Perspective, Balance, etc etc. So all that covers the other 85%, or SIX TIMES the value of Originality and Creativity. THAT IS MOST SERIOUSLY SICK !!!!!
Natcherly, I ignored all the rules and my scoring produced lotsa gasps and moans indicating, for me, Mission Accomplished.
It was a twofer. Numero Dos was the unmistakable message that a working artist/photographer (actual job title) will have a verrrry different vision than some silly assed "Photographic Society" rules. Numero Uno, my big win, is that I was never invited again ;-)