[2F/2F]

If it is one judge as suggested above, the only potentially sensible comparitive evaluation of submissions would be on the basis of print quality.

I disagree. The whole point of having one jurist is to have the final cut represent the jurist as well as the artists. If a jurist is on a kick about one concept, idea, or subject, so be it. That is why you select a single jurist – to infuse the "show" (book in this case) with his or her subjective outlook. It's not supposed to be "fair." It's supposed to be a collaborative artistic production. Attempting any sort of objectivity in the arts is pointless, as it is impossible. And selecting work based solely on it's technical merits is the surest way to end up with a book that is not worth looking at IMHO. There are a lot of good technicians here and everywhere. Technique is easy, because it is set in stone, and all it takes is practice. A very small percentage of those technicians actually create interesting content to me. A person who is poor technically and strong conceptually can always improve. It doesn't work the other way IMO. So, I think fairness and objectivity need to go out the window very early in this process, and a creative voice needs to take the lead, not someone hell bent on pleasing everyone.