It Doesn't Stop at AI Models
This is just the start, and why are models the ones who get keep their job?
AI is fucking everywhere, and it seems to be getting worse.
Business of Fashion posted an article with a series of AI images generated by Sybille De Saint Louvent to emulate high fashion brand campaigns from the likes of Hermes, Jil Sander, Gucci, Prada, Miu Miu and Loro Piana. Last week H&M announced they have partnered with 30 models and their agencies to generate a digital AI twin version of them, to use in social media and marketing campaigns. They even had quotes from some of the models talking about how it can enhance our profession rather than replace it. We will come back to that, but as these stories land on our feeds, the other half of the feed is filled with AI studio Ghibli edits, which a popular Reddit thread called “an insult to the studio/cinema in general.” So why is the fashion industry not calling it an insult to designers and the creative industries?
What is fashion’s obsession with AI all about? Do people not realise the real threat that it poses to not just creativity and jobs, but also to opportunity and representation? To an extent, this is the sort of shit I expect from fast fashion brands - streamline the design process, get AI to do the fulfilment processing, and chuck all the collection into an AI image generator, cutting costs and expenses at every level. Mango have already pushed out a wave of AI campaigns including a children’s line, which when you think about it, is weird af. But then again, operating ethically has never been for them, it has been the mantra of fast fashion; to pay as few people, as little as possible.
Here’s an example of how many people actually make up the team of a campaign photoshoot. The casting director posted it from the latest Flannels activewear campaign, Melissa Scott. Now imagine all of these jobs, minus the model and one other person were left out of it. Do you think all of these people would advocate for the use of AI in “enhancing their profession”.
An easy sell for people supporting the use of AI is to say it’s more sustainable to generate images than fly a whole team out to a location, put up and run all the equipment and then produce the shoot, but mostly that it is a lot cheaper. But at what cost? And is it so much more sustainable to counterbalance the unethical nature of the rest of the process? And it is it even that sustainable? Research articles are now investigating the energy usage of AI as well as the water usage associated with mostly cooling down the data centres that power it. One referencing the US Data Centres Energy Report, has predicted that global use of AI in 2027 will have the same water withdrawal as the entire country of Denmark, and around half a billion cubic metres will be consumed / evaporated.
Whilst the model quoted in the H&M piece claims it will enhance the profession rather than replace it, is this the job they claim to enjoy? Sitting at home, not travelling to incredible locations, not meeting new people and not being inspired by the creative work of other talented people on set, and being absent from witnessing the vision eventually come to life? Has the job been enhanced? In almost every interview with every model ever, they describe the main perks of the job being all of these things. But also, why does their job get to be somewhat retained and others’ don’t? What about the compensation for the people whose existing work are what is being used as the database for the AI to base its’ ‘ideas’ on? All of the never ending references, that exist on the internet and in culture, will never be credited fully or appropriately appreciated. I think it is short-sighted to believe that this is where AI stops, and while H&M may have found a way to work, on their terms, “collaboratively” with models, others like Mango have gone full blown and cut models out of the equation too.
A deeply unsettling thought for me is the fact that somewhere there will be a tech bro, sat at his computer asking it to manufacture pictures of a Black girl, to put into a fashion campaign of unethically made, exploitative and damaging clothing, to make an already rich, white Billionaire, even richer. Fucking defend that.
I struggle to see many benefits in this AI infiltration into fashion. While a lot of the publications and high profile press are lapping it up, one commenter on my instagram asked, “Why do Turkeys keep voting for Christmas?”. Yes there is perhaps a use to help prevent overconsumption in the manufacturing process and assess how much clothing should actually be made - something which analysts could also advise on I’m sure, but this perhaps speeds up the process. For me, it is always the biggest and most unethical brands who will try anything to utilise their vast resources to get the most out of their pennies, rather than the brands that only have pennies to play with. And this for me, is the clearest indication of their true intentions.
It’s extremely short sighted and I can see it spiralling out of control in the next year. How do they expect to regulate it ? In an industry where models don’t own the rights to their image when it’s actually them in front of the camera, what does that mean for the twin image ? I think fashion needs all the humanity it can get as it is, AI models can only be reductive for everyone involved (except for the said white billionaire).
I’m curious about what this means for body diversity in fashion I mean, how do the models keep control over their own personal weight fluctuations and how that affects what the AI version of themselves look like? or would the companies have the ability to enhance or not these models bodies, depending on what body type is trending?