San Francisco-based Levi Strauss & Co. recently announced that they’re going to be collaborating with Lalaland.ai to replace a wide range of models with hyperrealistic AI-generated subjects in an effort to increase “the number and diversity of [their] models for our products in a sustainable way,” according to a recent press release.
“While AI will likely never fully replace human models for us, we are excited for the potential capabilities this may afford us for the consumer experience,” said Dr. Amy Gershkoff Bolles, a Levi Strauss executive focused on emerging tech.
While collaborating with AI companies to spread messages like these seems like a great way to increase representation easily and effectively on the surface, it might just be one of the most detrimental decisions that a brand could make in this day and age.
Since the release, customers, models, designers, and journalists have all come at the company with intense backlash regarding their decision- and this one is big.
What Does AI Have to do With Fashion, Anyway?
AI has come a long way over the past decade, and there’s no doubt that its benefits have been unmatched across multiple industries. But there are various places in which many argue it shouldn’t be introduced- the fashion and style world being one of them.
Lalaland.ai is an Artificial Intelligence studio designed to help brands become “more inclusive, sustainable, and digital-minded” with the help of generative AI. It isn’t the only company in the AI-generated model game either. Earlier this month, Deep Agency launched what it describes as a photo studio without cameras, people, or a physical location.
Image: Levi Strauss & Co. / Lalaland.ai
And while it may look like companies who choose to rely on such resources are embracing and promoting diversity on billboards and in magazines, these steps can lead brands and partners to become less inclusive and far less flexible behind the scenes.
The “Real” Body
Replacing actual models with AI-generated subjects is a massive blow to diversity in the industry, and here’s why:
Diverse representation (including minority, disabled, and racially diverse models) is key to the growth of the fashion industry in the modern world, and something that nobody doubts should have become the norm a long time ago.
Size inclusivity isn’t just an issue in print and online, however, but on the runway.
According to Vogue Business data collected throughout this most recent fashion month, of 9,137 FW23 looks across 219 shows in New York, London, Milan, and Paris, just 0.6 percent were plus-size (US 14+) and 3.8 percent were mid-size (US 6-12). This means 95.6 percent of looks presented for the season were in a size US 0-4.
When high fashion alone has become a very limited space for diverse models to find representation, why let the same trends bleed into commercial industries?
The importance of having real people model real clothes is highly overlooked, as showing accurate representations of people and clothes is a massive step towards the normalization of various bodies, skin tones, heights, ages, conditions, etc.
One important brand that highlights this is Matilda Djerf’s Djerf Avenue, a Swedish, non-seasonal, ready-to-wear brand with the core values of sustainability, quality, and a sense of inclusivity and comfort no matter the piece.
“You will never find retouched models on our website or social media. Our photos come straight from the camera roll, we don’t believe in editing bodies, pimples, or clothing. This is us. Just the way we are. And we are proud.”
The Ripple Effect
Showing models is one thing, but hiring them is a whole other. One of the biggest career struggles that minority models have is booking and keeping jobs. By replacing them with AI-generated subjects- no matter how realistic- companies are lowering the demand for diverse models, hence taking away jobs and opportunities for those who need them most.
This is because by doing so, companies get to say they ran diverse and inclusive content without having to work with or hire diverse people, and the last thing any person wants to hear is that they might be acceptable to show and discuss, but not good enough to hire.
It stretches beyond models, too. Using AI to replace human beings in the fashion industry destroys jobs for makeup artists, photographers, editors, journalists, etc. as well. It can diminish opportunities for actual talent in the industry and create a world where jobs can be easily supplemented. This not only makes it more difficult for people (minority groups, especially) to find jobs, but it pushes these creatives away from embracing their passions due to an unstable market.
On The Bright Side
There are definitely some benefits to using AI in fashion, such as helping businesses make more informed decisions when it comes to supply chains and marketing tactics, hence reducing the chances of excess waste. 85% of our clothing is spread globally across landfills, meaning only 15% of the clothing produced is in circulation in our closets, stores, and thrift shops. AI uses technology to watch and predict the lifespans of certain trends and their respective sales, and if brands adhere to these tools, they can drop the number of these wasted garments significantly.
Moreover, AI is cost-efficient, fast, and requires no downtime. This can aid editors, CFOs, and PR teams in the fashion industry by performing simple tasks and running numbers and algorithms behind the scenes so that creatives can reduce their working hours and spend their time on the clock actually performing creative jobs.
At the end of the day, however, replacing models is not a direction that AI needs to move in. Keeping this in mind as we move further into the future and continue to embrace the effects technology has had on the fashion industry is going to be key in maintaining a steady journey toward genuine representation and inclusivity.
By: Mackenzie Ostrowski
Comments