Lately, many videos of female members have been so overexposed that the details are washed out. Is this being done intentionally? What do the male members think about it?

Thank you for your question. I’m Kida, the representative, and I’d like to answer as well. Recently, I told our photography specialists (that’s an actual position—Mizukami, Takei, and Okura): “Make them use the strobes. We bought expensive strobes for every branch, so make sure they use them.” And this is the result. I’m sorry. When you’re new to strobes (like me), you may not be able to bounce the light properly, making the image look unnaturally bright. The model’s skin can end up completely washed out, and when you look at just that one photo, it may seem like it was taken well. But when nothing but photos like that are lined up, it starts to look as though the skin tone has been artificially altered. From here, I’m going to make some adjustments and aim for photos that look more like they were taken in natural light—more like daytime. The reason is… our office situation. The ideal environment for photography is a room where natural light reflects throughout the space, making the woman look bright and stand out in the portrait. However, offices and rental spaces aren’t designed for photography, so they’re generally built to prevent too much sunlight from coming in. That’s why choosing an office is such a challenge every time. If we can use strobes (artificial light) creatively to take bright photos that look like they were shot in natural light, we can lower the rent, choose properties near the station, attract more women, reduce our ST costs, and make it easier to pass the savings on to members. From now on, we’ll be forming a “blown-out highlights police” and stepping up enforcement.

I’m Taro, a male member. I’m joining in because Maezawa-san’s rather niche answers are so entertaining. By the way, I used to own a medium-format camera, but I sold it on Mercari last year. I think times have changed（笑). These days, an iPhone is actually better. The old supercomputers—the Cray ones—had about the same processing power as an iPhone 4. The latest models are more than 40 times more powerful than that. They’ve already surpassed the capabilities of a “Showa-era man.” As for the questioner’s point, I’ve noticed the blown-out exposure too. But the reason I watch the videos is to see their voice, the way they speak, their expressions, and their mannerisms, so I’m not too concerned about image quality. It does strike me as a bit crafty, though. What bothers me more is when someone has exactly the same expression in every photo. Why just rely on the girl’s practiced pose? Make more of an effort to capture something in your own way, I think. For video work, it probably makes more sense to have a specialist handle it rather than having a regular staff member double up.

Maezawa from the president’s office will answer as well. Thank you for your question. The overexposure wasn’t intentional. What I was actually aiming for was a so-called high-key photograph: slightly overexposed and as bright as possible, while still retaining just enough tonal gradation to avoid blowing out the highlights. In reality, though, there are very few staff members who can control exposure that precisely, like threading a needle, so many of the photos ended up overexposed. That’s why I recommended shooting bursts using the AEB (auto exposure bracketing) function. But none of the staff seemed to think it was worthwhile, so I may have been the only one taking three-shot bursts with AEB enabled. To begin with, not many of the staff understand exposure. If I say, “Why don’t you stop down by one stop and try shooting?” most of them respond with things like: “One stop? What does that mean?” or: “What do you mean by ‘stop down’?” It’s difficult to communicate with them. Even when I explain that stopping down means changing the aperture from F1.4 to F2.0, for example, and suggest trying F2.0, they simply change the aperture and end up with a dark photo, saying, “It’s darker, so it doesn’t work.” Then I explain, “No, you stop down while keeping the exposure the same.” But they just go, “？？？” When I try to clarify that keeping the exposure the same means keeping the EV value the same, and that after stopping down by one stop you need to either reduce the shutter speed by one stop or raise the ISO by one stop, they seem to get even more confused. At that point, the conversation stops going anywhere. Their basic training is essentially, “Take a photo, look at the rear LCD, turn the dial randomly, then take another photo and adjust it until it looks whitish,” so I suppose it can’t really be helped. Still, I do wish they knew the basics. The rear LCD is pretty unreliable to begin with. The colors can look different, and it’s only an approximate way of checking exposure. Wouldn’t the proper approach be to first understand the difference between the actual monitor and the rear LCD, then apply something like, “When it looks just right on the rear LCD, add another +0.3”? I’m probably the only one who thinks that way, though. (笑) So, don’t worry too much about the exposure. Nobody knows what EV, AV, or TV means, and they aren’t adjusting things while checking the histogram either. (笑) P.S. > “An iPhone 11 or 12 Pro would actually be better, but I guess that wouldn’t work for the performance aspect of ‘taking photos.’” It’s not for the performance aspect, but for the background blur. That’s why I use a full-frame DSLR rather than an APS-C or Four Thirds camera. I also use a large-aperture medium-telephoto lens, even though it makes full-body shots difficult in a narrow room. A medium-format digital camera would produce even more background blur, but they’re simply too expensive. And considering that today’s medium-format digital cameras are actually smaller than 645 format, they’re a little questionable. It would be nice if a medium-format digital camera with something around a 6×7-sized sensor appeared at a reasonable price. But with smartphones eating into the market and sales of interchangeable-lens cameras declining, prices probably won’t come down. The subject of iPhones has come up many times. I do feel that we’re approaching an era where digital background blur is good enough, but I think the period when genuine optical blur is still preferable will probably continue for another ten years or so. P.S. 2 > “By the way, I used to own a medium-format camera, but I sold it on Mercari last year.” I used to own a CONTAX 645 too, but I sold it about five years ago. That was because film had become difficult to obtain. I’ve also used a Mamiya 67 and a Pentax 645, but I remember selling both of them almost immediately after buying them. I also owned Fuji’s medium-format camera with a non-interchangeable lens. That one was light and convenient. It was for commemorative photos, though. (笑)

I’m Kazu, a male member. A lot of the photos do seem slightly overexposed. I assume they’re edited that way to make the skin look clearer. Since almost every time, the person doesn’t look quite as good in real life as in the photos, I can understand where you’re coming from. I’ve even said to the staff before, “XX is way too good at taking photos, haha.” But Universe needs to attract men with those photos and get them to make offers in order to generate revenue, so I suppose it’s understandable. That said, since men are going to make offers anyway, they don’t really need to raise our expectations so unrealistically. The person who ends up bearing the disappointment is the woman herself, after all. Still, I think saying that the current photos haven’t been retouched is a reasonable compromise. I don’t watch many of the videos, so sorry for only talking about the photos.