Notes on Jury Process
Exposure’s jury process is built on shared criteria, multiple independent reviewers, and clear safeguards against conflicts of interest. Here's how it works, and what jurors are looking for in submissions to the International Open Call and North West Showcase.
Updated September, 2026
PANEL COMPOSITION
Panel size and composition vary by Open Call. The North West Showcase jury is made up of five roles: a National Juror, two Community Jurors, a representative from the host exhibition venue, and an Exposure representative. The International Open Call jury is made up of three roles: an International Juror, a Community Juror, and an Exposure representative.
Current jurors and bios will be listed on the International Open Call and North West Showcase pages as they are confirmed.
WHY THE PANELS ARE BUILT THIS WAY
Jurors are selected for depth of expertise and standing within their field — as curators, artists, educators, or arts professionals — and for the distinct perspective their work brings to the panel. Community Jurors bring grounded knowledge of the local and regional arts landscape — its institutions, histories, and ongoing conversations. The National/International Juror situates each Open Call within a broader photographic conversation. Exposure representatives ensure continuity with the organization's mission and values.
Together, these roles are intended to bring a range of practices, backgrounds, and vantage points to the panel.
WHAT JURORS ARE LOOKING FOR
Two criteria: Artistic Strength and Relevance & Resonance, are scored independently by each juror on a four-point scale (Exceptional, Strong, Moderate, Limited), then averaged into a single result.
Artistic Strength looks at execution and intention: whether technical and presentation choices feel deliberate, whether the artist statement is clearly reflected in the images themselves, and whether the work reflects a considered, individual approach.
Relevance & Resonance looks at urgency: whether the work engages with ideas, experiences, or questions that matter right now. This doesn't require a connection to a current social or political issue. Urgency can also come from perspective (the artist's point of view and lived experience) or from a re-imagined approach to the medium (work that challenges convention and shows something not seen before).
A third consideration, Exhibition Potential, is a screening flag rather than a score. It asks whether a submission's format and medium suit the exhibition's presentation context: a group show, with wall space divided evenly among selected artists. Some unconventional or specific presentation needs can be accommodated, though not everything is feasible within this format. Flagged concerns are carried into group discussion rather than affecting a submission's individual score.
The final consideration, Curatorial Breadth, isn't assessed by individual jurors. Once a shortlist is established, the full jury considers it together: does the shortlisted work reflect a genuine range of practices, backgrounds, and cultural contexts, and does it read as a cohesive exhibition as a whole?
Download the complete scoring rubric, including full evaluation criteria.
HOW THE PROCESS WORKS
Conflicts are declared upfront. Before reviewing any submissions, each juror discloses any personal, professional, or financial connection to an applicant. Where a conflict exists, that juror steps back from scoring or discussing that submission.
Jurors review independently. Each juror scores all eligible submissions against the criteria described above.
Scores are compiled. Individual scores for Artistic Strength and Relevance & Resonance are averaged into a ranked list, with Exhibition Potential flags noted alongside.
The jury meets to discuss. The full jury convenes to resolve any submissions with differing scores, address flagged Exhibition Potential concerns, and consider Curatorial Breadth: how the shortlisted work functions together as one exhibition.
Selections are confirmed. The jury reaches a final list of selected artists, along with a small number of ranked alternates.
