Hi Kristina
Thanks again for your comments and taking time to post. I am addressing many of your questions at this moment about comp levels - just waiting for the rest of the committee to let me know what they think before In publish some guidelines. I also understand what you say about technical versus more aesthetic beauty - a great example, which I just posted on another thread in the forum, is the Audubon 2016 Photo awards - absolutely inspirational without being the stock standard photo: https://www.audubon.org/magazine/may-june-2016/the-2016-audubon-photography-awards-winners
Its a tough issue because I think bird photographers are essentially divided into two groups. The traditionalists who think a good photo is only one that is pin-sharp, clear background, no toning etc. On the other hand, there are those that are more artistic in their interpretation - and I hasten to add I am not talking about Photoshopping here - I am talking about composition straight out of camera too (eg Vultures at sunset, osprey image). I think the Audubon award winning photos show a way in between where you can have both technical quality and artistically inspiring images. I know if you take a photo at sunset here of an osprey, for instance, the top Australian bird photographers insist that you adjust the 'tone' to remove the golden hue of sunset - whereas to me, that late sun light is exactly what you saw and more reflective of reality - as well as being more pleasing to the eye. I find it quite frustrating. Personally, when I look at the photos in Audubon I think we in Australia still have a long way to go - myself included. I also fall into the trap of being too technical. When I realise how far I have to go before I can achieve the level of the Audubon winners it is daunting but also incredibly exciting.
Cheers, Georgina