How to judge collections

Well, now that THAT’S settled, how about another question to which there may not be an easy answer, i.e. which of the two collections pictured by Kirby is the more beautiful? I suspect many will disagree with me, but despite the indisputable beauty of each of the flowers in both collections, I find the first collection only medium on my scale of beauty. Well, maybe a bit more than medium because there is a very good balance of yellow and white perianths and there is a very fine double to contribute some diversity-of-shape interest. However, the collection is still dominated by nice, flat, smooth Div 1, 2 and 3 cultivars. To my notion, it would have been much more interesting, and beautiful, had there been at least one more double or, better two or three flowers from Divisions 5 and up, placed so as to provide contrast in shape, size and color to the collection. I find the second collection uninteresting and not very beautiful at all, despite the beauty of the individual flowers. It appears to me that there are only Div 1, 2 and 3 cultivars, which gives it a certain monotony of shape, and the predominance of yellow perianths detracts further. (If these were Bozeivich entries, I believe the second collection would be disqualified for having only 3 divisions represented.) Yes, I know we don’t give points for beauty. I’m not sure beauty is even mentioned in the judges’ handbook for collections of standards. At least we’re able to consider “grace” when judging miniatures, even though there are no points assigned.
As you might assume from the foregoing, I think a collection of flowers, including daffodils, ought to be interesting and beautiful as well as scoring high on a point scale. Of course, it’s easy to say that but pretty hard to put into practice. However , our colleagues who judge the design sections of our shows do something quite similar, don’t they? I wonder if we horticulture judges could do something like that.