In my mind, judging should revolve around 2 major considerations - what the photographer is trying to say and how well this is portrayed in the photograph.  The first consideration can be called creativity, the second, technical proficiency - exposure, focus, etc.

However, in most judging, technical proficiency looms large, while creativity tends to take a back seat.  Ideally, they should figure more-or-less equally. Creativity is hard to quantify and judging it can be difficult, but it is the soul of photography.  In addition to original subject matter, it can include new ways of approaching everyday subjects.  And the photo that takes a fresh look at our world, either at the previously unseen or at the familiar from a new angle, merits a higher score for just these reasons.

I remember a visiting judge who always announced that he would not give any photo more than a 7 (out of 10) if it did not show creativity.  He gave one of my entries "a very competent 7", but it was the one "8" I got from him that makes me especially proud!