Courtesy of Mish.
Here is an easy prediction: Price of fashion models in advertizements is going to collapse, if indeed the industry survives at all.
Why should retailers pay for fashion models when an advertizing department can generate models with the perfect height, weight, breast size, nationality, and complexion for whatever designs they want to promote?
Bad News For Super-Models
MarketWatch describes the setup in 5 computer-generated sales pitches
To save on costs—and perhaps assembly time—Swedish retailing giant IKEA created computer-generated images of its furniture for the new catalog, rather than hiring a photographer. By next year, a quarter of the scenes depicted in IKEA’s print and online advertising will be digitally drawn rather than photographed, The Wall Street Journal reported last week. In fact, IKEA says it is able to better depict its products with computer images than actual photography.
IKEA is not alone. Hollywood filmmakers increasingly create characters—and not just special effects—with CGI animation. And some fashion lines are finding that it’s less expensive to create the perfect specimen digitally than to track down America’s Next Top Model. These computer-generated realities may be cheaper, more appealing, and more versatile than the genuine articles.
The MarketWatch article also discussed simulated driving of cars, movie special effects, and 3-D dream homes.
Special effects are nothing new. New car models come out only once a year. And I believe most people want real images of homes, not simulated models.
In contrast, clothing changes four times a year, with each season, and also varies by weight, height, size, nationality, skin color, age, etc.
Fashion Questions of the Day
Do I care if the person wearing a sweater in a printed image is generated or real? Why would I? How would I know in the first place?…