5 ms·

While AI models might replace catalogue models for small labels that are starting out (maybe) and for e-commerce companies (definitely). I highly doubt it that

While AI models might replace catalogue models for small labels that are starting out (maybe) and for e-commerce companies (definitely). I highly doubt it that they will replace real models for large companies and fashion boutiques now or ever. Because what people (women and men) are buying is aspiration wrapped in dead plant fibers. The reason why I buy a dress from Hervé Leger is because I want to look like old school Crawford making body-con a thing in the ‘90s https://media.glamour.com/photos/56959302d9dab9ff41b2a79b/master/w_1600%2Cc_limit/fashion-2015-09-cindy-crawford-black-herve-leger-dress-1996-main.jpg https://media.glamour.com/photos/56959302d9dab9ff41b2a79b/ma... and make the painful process of getting into that shape and look seem “easy” while doing it. Fashion isn’t about looking good in of itself. It’s about social proof-of-work. Knowing what to wear and pulling it off isn’t easy. It’s the raison d’être of the multi-billion dollar fashion and fitness industries. Women eat grass all day everyday and go on ridiculous juice cleanses while contorting their body into shapes that would put a pretzel to shame. If the world endures so much pain to look effortlessly good, Why should manufacturers be allowed to forego the pain? If the root of aspiration is making the impossible look like a breeze, then why would anyone want to buy from a computer generated perfect model that never had to feel the pull of a difficult stretch and stare in the mirror with guilty eyes? The suspension of disbelief necessary for the social economy to function crumbled as soon as something is too perfect. Like Instagram photos. It’s not cool to slap on a filter anymore and stage a perfect photo. It’s too easy now. Just like Prisma was. What’s cool is to put in the work and make something imperfect so that everyone knows that you put in the effort and looked unflappably blasé while doing it. Most models that are hired today are hired partly on their social presence. Having an audience, even a micro-audience, is essential for getting high paid gigs, because brands aren’t just selling the look; they’re selling the whole package associated with the look. Women like to buy from other women (and men like James Charles) whom they can aspire to. Tweens and teens want to look like the models on tik-tok. Young-adults and grown women want to look like their favorite YouTuber and Instagram celeb. They all want to participate in making something cool happen with their friends. All of this and more is intrinsically social and human. All of this and more means that as long as humans buy from other humans, brands will hire models to appeal to what’s most human; sexy, sexy crazy-making envy.

tastygreenapple 8y ago
Completely disagree. You buy the dress because you want to convince yourself you look like old school Crawford or you want others to be convinced that you look like old school Crawford. The point of models 99% of the time is to show the clothes. This isn't going to get rid of super models, but it's going to step on the turf of all but the most popular models.
hn_throwaway_99 8y ago
This may be true, but I'm sure the vast, vast, vast majority of people employed as models are these kinds of print and e-commerce models whose jobs are now at risk.
nkozyra 8y ago
At the point where you can't distinguish between real/organic and generated, this argument collapses though. What feels "human" can be manufactured. Imperfections can be artificial, too. We like to believe we're flawless arbiters of what's human, but we can be fooled in almost all cases. Most of all in photos. The soul remains an abstract concept.
alexpotato 8y ago
I both agree and disagree. > Because what people (women and men) are buying is aspiration wrapped in dead plant fibers In this case I agree. If someone buys the watch that Elon Musk wears, it's not just about wanting to look like Elon, it's about want to BE him. This effect works even if rationally people know that they are not him. Emotionally, they just want the feeling, however fleeting, that they are him. > The suspension of disbelief necessary for the social economy to function crumbled as soon as something is too perfect. Here I disagree and the example of fake Instagram profiles are my counter point. Some of these accounts used real people but the entire "lifestyle" was faked and yet they still had thousands and thousands of followers. What's the difference between creating a fake person to drop into that fake profile and having it be a real person?
GuiA 8y ago
Fully agreed. One side effect of that is that while modeling has always been very hard to pierce into, at least there are modeling opportunities for non celebrities. As the practice of using AI to generate models for all but higher end stuff grows, it will get harder and harder to pierce into. It’ll go from an industry with tens of thousands of workers - some paid a lot, some much less - to just a few hundreds of highly paid models who have every incentive to prevent newcomers from taking their spot. It’s not a phenomenon unique to fashion, and it’s entirely problematic when tech kills the long tail of this sort of occupation. How will those people pay their bills now? Not all of them can become AI engineers, that’s for sure.

tastygreenapple 8y ago

Completely disagree. You buy the dress because you want to convince yourself you look like old school Crawford or you want others to be convinced that you look like old school Crawford. The point of models 99% of the time is to show the clothes. This isn't going to get rid of super models, but it's going to step on the turf of all but the most popular models.

hn_throwaway_99 8y ago

This may be true, but I'm sure the vast, vast, vast majority of people employed as models are these kinds of print and e-commerce models whose jobs are now at risk.

nkozyra 8y ago

At the point where you can't distinguish between real/organic and generated, this argument collapses though. What feels "human" can be manufactured. Imperfections can be artificial, too. We like to believe we're flawless arbiters of what's human, but we can be fooled in almost all cases. Most of all in photos. The soul remains an abstract concept.

alexpotato 8y ago

I both agree and disagree. > Because what people (women and men) are buying is aspiration wrapped in dead plant fibers In this case I agree. If someone buys the watch that Elon Musk wears, it's not just about wanting to look like Elon, it's about want to BE him. This effect works even if rationally people know that they are not him. Emotionally, they just want the feeling, however fleeting, that they are him. > The suspension of disbelief necessary for the social economy to function crumbled as soon as something is too perfect. Here I disagree and the example of fake Instagram profiles are my counter point. Some of these accounts used real people but the entire "lifestyle" was faked and yet they still had thousands and thousands of followers. What's the difference between creating a fake person to drop into that fake profile and having it be a real person?

GuiA 8y ago

Fully agreed. One side effect of that is that while modeling has always been very hard to pierce into, at least there are modeling opportunities for non celebrities. As the practice of using AI to generate models for all but higher end stuff grows, it will get harder and harder to pierce into. It’ll go from an industry with tens of thousands of workers - some paid a lot, some much less - to just a few hundreds of highly paid models who have every incentive to prevent newcomers from taking their spot. It’s not a phenomenon unique to fashion, and it’s entirely problematic when tech kills the long tail of this sort of occupation. How will those people pay their bills now? Not all of them can become AI engineers, that’s for sure.