Runway shows are rebooting for the joy of those ones who missed the front row and, while Valentino and Saint Laurent will decamp to Venice in July and host their shows in the lagoon, other brands are currently trying to bridge the gap between digital and physical with mixed results.
The lookbook of Vetements' Spring 2022 collection features for example models standing against the default gray and white checkerboard that indicates transparent areas in Photoshop.
That was just the first reference to the digital world in this collection by brand cofounder Guram Gvasalia. The pandemic year has turned us into digital beings, half human and half virtual, perennially connected with other people via our screens, so Gvasalia used this inspiration for the prints included in the new collection of the Zurich-based brand.
The Spring 2022 collection features prints of coloured wires of the kind that form the veins and arteries of robots, and patterns representing the green rain code - comprising mirror images of half-width kana characters and Western Latin letters and numerals - from "The Matrix".
The fourth film in the series will be released just before Christmas, so the collection with its green rain codes and tailored all-black outfits will be appreciated by the fans of the saga.
Silhouette-wise there weren't any big changes compared to previous collections as the emphasis was as usual on exaggerated shoulder lines, and the collection featured (again as usual) plenty of puffers and thigh high boots.
Any glitches in the system? Yes, some dilemmas regarding one cute print of a lilac or black unicorn cat accompanied by the words "Unicorn Hybrid 3000".
The lilac version of the cat is taken from the TurboSquid site by Shutterstock, a 3D model library ideal for game developers, news agencies, architects, visual effects studios and creative professionals. The 3D model used for this collection is the Kittycorn by Anko3d available on Turbosquid also in white with rainbow details (but not in black like the one included in this collection). The model can be currently purchased for $64.
This is essentially the same trick Guram's brother Demna played at Balenciaga when he included in the A/W 18 collection a bag with a picture of a cat and a dog taken from stock photo site Dreams Time. In that case you could download the image for free or you could buy the rights to use it.
In the previous post about Balenciaga's collection we wondered if it is possible to actually buy a stock photo, put it on a luxury item, and sell the latter at improbable prices. The first question in cases such as these ones is therefore did the fashion house in question actually buy the license for the images to be reproduced on designer clothes? (in these cases it should be a commercial license with extended copyrights for branded purposes).
In the case of the Kittycorn, was the author of the image told that the image created as a 3D model may be used as a print in a designer collection? (note: explicit rights clearances must be obtained from the owner of the depicted intellectual property as this is not a generic image of a cat, but an original artwork showing a hybrid animal in specific colour combinations). And what happens if a manufacturer of fake designer goods buys the same 3D model and license and starts printing it on its own garments and accessories? This "fake" may end up not being a fake because the manufacturer in question has purchased the licence like Vêtements did (well, if Vêtements actually did it - considering the black Kittycorn is not available on TurboSquid, so maybe Vêtements just copied this image?).
Using a stock photo as in Balenciaga's case or a stock 3D model as in this case for a designer item seems to facilitate the process of producing perfectly legal fakes: if you copy a logo you are producing an illegal fake, but if you pay for the license for the same stock image a luxury fashion house has put on its garments and accessories, technically you are not producing an illegal copy of anything (after all, that image is not exclusive to that fashion house).
It is annoying to think that a designer brand can not come up with something more original (the collection also features garments with the sentence "The Devil Doesn't Wear Prada", a quote from Tyler, The Creator?) and exclusive (if they liked the Kittycorn, they may have got in touch with the artist who created it and asked to create something unique for this collection), but can just buy a stock image/model and use it in its collections (even though it would be even more annoying if Vêtements hadn't actually paid for the licence but had merely recreated the Kittycorn). Oh well, who knows, maybe all these questions do not matter at all as, like Neo, living in a Matrix-like computer simulation of reality, fashion has just turned into a giant simulation, a place ruled by laziness where the main point is not producing innovative and original things, but just churning out pale copies of something existing in an infinitely more original real world.
Comments