Fashion bible Vogue faced some backlash last month over their August issue, specifically the inclusion of an ad for Guess clothing that was “produced” using AI. (Or as our current Secretary of Education calls it, “A-1.”) Seraphinne Vallora was the agency behind the ad, and they dished out word salads in defense of their process. The thing that really stuck in my craw was the fact that the process involved… taking photos of real humans and clothing before feeding it through the AI–o–meter! On a fundamental level, I just can’t fathom how adding in the extra AI step is really worth it. They’re taking pictures of models and modeled items anyway, why can’t we just leave it at that?! But AI is steamrolling into the fashion industry regardless, and now some models are opting to have themselves digitally cloned with certain AI companies that will then act as quasi agents, licensing the digital likenesses for a fee.
A model’s dilemma: Fashion model Hannah James faced a dilemma as she weighed whether to digitally clone herself. On one hand, the 25-year-old worries digital replicas of models could render her job obsolete. On the other hand, the Los Angeles model wants to get ahead of artificial intelligence and use it to potentially make more money before it’s too late. She partnered this year with Kartel.ai, a Beverly Hills startup that’s building a platform for brands and businesses to license the likenesses of models for a fee. Kartel.ai helps models create digital replicas of themselves that can be hired for advertising campaigns.
Robots are easier to work with: Advancements in AI have made it easier to generate digital clones of models or virtual people who don’t exist in real life. Unlike real people, AI models and digital clones don’t get sick or deal with bad-skin days. AI models can be in many places at the same time, and they don’t need a break as campaigns try different shots, locations and products.
Saving or losing money? Models may earn less from jobs their digital clones perform compared with booking in-person shoots, but they might also be able to complete more jobs without the need to travel to a location. Ben Kusin, co-founder of Kartel.ai, said the use of AI and digital clones could help brands cut down on the other expenses tied to producing an ad campaign, such as booking travel and employing stylists to do hair and makeup. With licensing of AI clones, models will still be paid and can choose whether they allow a brand to use their likeness. “A lot of folks need to re-skill quickly to be able to survive what’s the upcoming transition into this new world of AI-generated media,” he said.
An unfashionable way to use AI: Brands still have to tread carefully. In 2023, Levi’s faced criticism after the company said it was partnering with AI company Lalaland.ai to create AI models with a variety of skin tones and body types, sparking questions about why they didn’t just hire more and diverse models. Kusin said he draws the line, though, at creating models that don’t exist in real life, as Guess did in its ad campaign.
The brave new world AI users envision: Valentina Gonzalez and Andreea-Laura Petrescu, who founded the AI marketing agency Seraphinne Vallora, which worked with Guess, said they’re not trying to destroy the modeling industry. …The duo, who met as students studying architecture, pointed out there’s still a design process they go through to create AI models. It involves taking photos of real clothing and models and placing those images in a database. They envision a future where human models, their digital clones and completely AI-generated models coexist.
I think this is the line that completely did me in: “Unlike real people, AI models and digital clones don’t get sick or deal with bad-skin days.” First off, no sh-t Sherlock. But more importantly, and in the utmost existential version of this question — what are we doing here? Cause what I see, is humans actively working to make humans redundant. I see AI tech business folks crowing about the expenses other businesses will save, while not adequately addressing all the jobs that will be lost. A photo shoot doesn’t employ models alone; there are stylists, hair & makeup artists, photographers, location scouts, drivers, production assistants who fill out permits or liaise in other ways, and on and on. And all of those are practical concerns, wholly aside from the fact that my organic living heart is breaking from the utter lack of love and respect for hand-crafted works made by imperfect yet ever striving artists. Camus surmised of Sisyphus’s eternal quest to push the rock up the hill, “The struggle itself towards the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart.” By contrast, AI is a shortcut to fill a few men’s pockets.
They should send a proposal to William. The AI king. He’ll love it.
I’ve worked inside the tech industry for 30+ years and all these people care about is getting as rich as possible. They are greedy, cynical and amoral. They don’t care about consequences, enabling a just society or any bothersome existential question. It’s only ever about the money and the power it buys you.
AI is just a marketing term to repackage things we already have. This is just photoshop.
Fashion shoots have always resulted in unrealistic representations of the clothing, because no one can tell what a garment will look like on a real person when the models are 100 pound, 5 foot 10 inch tall 15-year-olds. Now we’re going to simulations of the clothing on AI clones? What’s even the point? Let’s just go back to the Gibson girl drawings of the Gilded Age then!
As a US citizen I’ve also been concerned about the end-game of AI. If business owners make workers redundant, who will buy their products? If industries are automated, how will these workers find another job? Employers don’t see the danger of creating a massive, impoverished underclass who will be desperate to survive. It brings to mind France leading up to the Revolution. Or the Great Depression. Or turning the US into Gilead. Business owners don’t realize that they are also expendable, competition will be fierce for consumers meager dollars.
I agree with you so much…
Those at the top seem willing to risk extinction in order to squeeze the last penny from the masses.
who do these companies think they’ll be selling their products to when they’ve made most people redundant replaced with cheap ai “workers”?
The gradual replacement of human beings for AI is awful. But this spin as a positive is sickening. They’ll pay the models less for their likeness for starters, then they’ll use AI models.