Why young designers shouldn’t miss the digital boat

What’s Web3?

It’s a really fuzzy area, to be completely honest. This and the ‘metaverse’ are two terms that are thrown around, but what does it actually mean? It means a lot of stuff. It ranges from immersive experiences, gaming experiences, NFTs, anything blockchain-related. Web3 in general is talking about this next incarnation of the Web that is decentralized. The fact that people are spending more and more time in these environments has increased; it’s just a given at this stage that this process is happening. I’m doing the Digital Fashion Archive now, where we do projects for museums and companies that want to do something more tailored to their needs, around their campaigns or other marketing efforts. In the past, I’ve done things for brands with avatars and NFTs. It’s pretty broad in terms of what projects could look like, but the unifying principle is that it’s all under this umbrella of Web3/Metaverse. It’s digital ways of doing things, but keeping a refined quality that’s important to brands who want to position themselves in a certain part of the market. Not necessarily just luxury, but brands that have a sensitivity for the kind of content that they make, and how that can enter the digital realm.

“I love fashion deeply, which I think you need to in order to survive Louise Wilson and the MA.” – Assaf Reeb

You graduated in 2013 – how does one go from studying an MA Fashion under Louise Wilson to ten years later doing a Web3-focused company? 

I love fashion deeply, which I think you need to in order to survive Louise Wilson and the MA. I’ve been doing things that are digital-related since 2016. It was always a part of my practice in terms of fashion, but around that time I started to lean more into doing projects that are digital in nature. Obviously I had a very different skill set then, different tools, different resources to work with. I was really curious about image-making; less so about the physical aspects of production, and the broken business model of the industry. I was really excited and curious about how you can transcend the essence of what we’re doing in fashion into a new reality. There are things that I and everyone who works in fashion really enjoy, and some of those things translate really well into other realms, and others don’t. So that’s what I’ve been obsessed with over the past few years, but it was a very non-linear journey. At some point I created a virtual platform for the MA Fashion [with one of my collaborators]. We were building a B2B platform for brands and games to connect and exchange licensing rights for virtual garments as skins. And working with a 260 year-old porcelain company to create NFTs. I had a project where I was working with an NFT company that became really successful and sold out their entire collection during the hype of ‘21-22, and were making millions of dollars selling these female characters – we built a digital fashion brand for them. So with what I’ve been doing, everything ties into one fuzzy domain that combines all of those things. I’m struggling to put one word to it.

If I think about digital fashion in 2016, it wasn’t very high tech or beautiful. In contrast, with the Digital Fashion Archive, the garments are reflected so realistically. That’s definitely a good change within this 6-7 year period.

Definitely. I think this idea of digital fashion has excited not only me but a lot of other people. Because I love fashion, I was quite frustrated with the inability to translate a lot of things that make fashion enjoyable and exciting into those environments. There are some things that translate really well to a game, but not many. I think the joy you get from a fashion garment and the exclusivity of it, the beauty of it; those are the things that make a frayed Comme des Garçons jacket from the 80s much more valuable than a similar one from ZARA from last year. It’s the context, it’s the details – and that doesn’t translate very well.

“If you’re completely giving up on that heritage of fashion, then you’re left with very little. You’re left with a very superficial and flat notion of fashion, which is essentially a logo on a t-shirt.” – Assaf Reeb

Often in CGI and 3D, they use the term ‘stylized’: how much it deviates from reality. So there’s realistic and stylized. There’s ‘high poly’ and ‘low poly’. There’s levels of definition, like how highly defined is the thing? How detailed is it, and how much does it reflect reality versus how much does it take a fantasy approach? How do you translate the inherent value of fashion into the digital environment? Yes, the value is abstract; it lies in the details, in the make, in the context of the garment. What was the show like? What was the atmosphere and the music? If you’re completely giving up on that heritage of fashion, then you’re left with very little. You’re left with a very superficial and flat notion of fashion, which is essentially a logo on a t-shirt. I think that’s the part that has made the transition into gaming, 3D and the metaverse. We’ve seen really big collaborations between large brands and large gaming companies, doing things in games or augmented reality.

Like Balenciaga.

For example, I don’t want to name names. But how Balenciaga is that really? Or how Nike is that? You get the essence of what the game is like, but you’re not really getting the essence of the brand. It becomes harder and harder with some brands. Like when you’re thinking about a brand like Chanel, you have the logo, which is easy to translate, you have the chain, but obviously that’s not what makes Chanel ‘Chanel’, right? There are so many intricate details that make Chanel ‘Chanel’. Even what Balenciaga is doing now, what differentiates a a $20 hoodie from a $1000 hoodie? There are things that make the difference, but how do you translate those things into a very abstract world without a sense of touch, a sense of smell – without all these senses that you’re missing? That’s what I find really interesting. How much can we push what’s possible today in those environments, in order to capture the qualities that are important in garments and make them valuable?

“When you think about most luxury brands and consider what makes them most valuable, it’s usually not the last collection.” – Assaf Reeb

When you think about most luxury brands and consider what makes them most valuable, it’s usually not the last collection. You usually think about an iconic show from ten years ago, when you think about brand X. When you think about brand Y, you think about a creative director that was working there 20 years ago, and not necessarily about what’s on the shelf right now. These things are really difficult to translate. And what I’m trying to do with the Digital Fashion Archive, it’s about trying to create a platform that helps brands perpetuate their heritage. That keeps this information in the garment, and that uses the cutting edge of what is currently possible with CGI and 3D to bring those garments into the digital. So it’s really about pushing the limits of what’s possible.

It sounds like a great marketing tool for brands. What is exactly the purpose of the Digital Fashion Archive? Because it’s not necessarily about commerce, is it?

I think there’s a huge potential in commerce. One of the main assets that brands have are the archives. What some heritage brands mostly make money from are perfumes and lipsticks, and still the archive is what people imagine when they think of the brand. I think that when the technology is there, it meets this ground truth version of the garments, it meets some kind of really accurate way of replicating the garments that could be something that later derivatives are being created out of. In one way it’s an officially approved representation of the brand in the virtual realm. So in that sense, yes it has value for marketing, but I think it also has a strategic value beyond marketing. It’s a product in itself but it’s also a starting point for many other use cases that could emerge from that. So if you want to put something in a game, this is the most accurate version of colors and textures that you could take and downgrade to a certain environment. When we work with a designer, it’s not like we go to a vintage shop, buy something and digitize it. It’s an officially recognized model that the designer signs off.

“We have conversations with archivists who are super frustrated. Once the garment goes to the archive, nobody will ever see it worn again, because you’re not allowed to do it from a preservation point of view.” – Assaf Reeb

So essentially, if you were working with a designer, you could also create a digital garment that can then be used for a game.

Yes. We are thinking like 50 years ahead. What is going to happen to all these valuable garments in 50 years time? This is another level but it’s super important: the archival level. Archives are super valuable tools for brands but also generally for education and researchers. We’re taking a pattern-first kind of digitization approach. We can pay attention to the texture and to how it’s translated to digital, but we also recreate the pattern. It’s a resource that’s really valuable. Thinking back to the MA and how we had these random, non-standard pattern blocks – you’d have something like a Yohji jacket from the 80s or a Comme des Garçons thing from the 90s. Using that as a starting point – just to understand how a certain fit is made, or how a pattern could be developed – is really valuable. And when you’re in a house, many times the same shapes reoccur; you have the same sleeve, or there is a certain approach to the waist that can remain for many years. Having access to that as a designer, not by making an appointment to an archive, but just accessing that in a file, that’s really valuable. That’s another thing we’re doing which I think is really important. We have conversations with archivists who are super frustrated. Once the garment goes to the archive, nobody will ever see it worn again, because you’re not allowed to do it from a preservation point of view. So being able to dress it on a human-like avatar in a very realistic setting with all the details, and having information about the shape and the pattern, is really important if you’re thinking on how to preserve and how to access this knowledge.

What are your thoughts on where this is moving in the next 10-15 years? And how do you see all of this impacting younger brands?

I think technology is moving very fast, but it’s also very slow to some extent. Let’s talk about the potential dream scenario for somebody like me, where we’re able to experience virtual worlds in a way that’s so engaging, realistic and immersive that it gives us at least as good an experience as the real world. That’s some kind of peak, if we’re thinking about progress in that way. Or let’s say, it’s integrated in our life in a way where the value that we can get from these environments is similar to what we can get from real life, in the context of clothing and fashion. What does it mean in practicality? It means that you can look at someone and they could be wearing whatever digital outfit they want, and you don’t have to open your phone and start an app for that – it just happens in an immersive way. That could be through some kind of Neuralink or some kind of headset from Apple. That’s one ‘goal’, or something that we’re hoping for – that it looks really good, and that you can’t even tell the difference between reality or not. Would that happen in 10-15 years? Maybe. There are different kinds of bottlenecks that are technological but also connected to adoption. It could take 5 years or 20 years. It’s really difficult to say. But it’s also not going to be a transition from 0 to 100. We started with face filters of puppies, and then we shifted to much more sophisticated aesthetics. There’s this AR approach to clothes that companies like DressX are doing, where you can wear stuff. That’s kind of a preliminary stage, but it gets improved more and more. Gaming environments are becoming more and more elaborate. So I think we’re moving on a gradient, and it’s constantly improving.

“In order to compete in fashion as a young designer, you need to have a competitive edge in terms of production and distribution with the big brands, which is almost impossible. It’s not sustainable. But to compete in that realm, you don’t need a factory, you don’t need any kind of instructure that costs more than a few thousands bucks.” – Assaf Reeb

How do you feel that sits with brands?

I think that for brands to ignore these kinds of opportunities is not a wise decision. There’s a new generation of C-levels that understand and invest in it. If you look at any large luxury brand, that’s a priority for them – how they’re gonna be present in the metaverse. So purely digital products are going to be a big source of revenue for them. When we spoke four years ago, you could say that it was wishful thinking, but a lot has changed since. I think that now it’s really clear, and you see that even by looking at their budgets, in terms of staff and opening entire departments that are focused on it.

The amazing thing for young brands is that you don’t need to be a huge to do all of this. In order to compete in fashion as a young designer, you need to have a competitive edge in terms of production and distribution with the big brands, which is almost impossible. It’s not sustainable. But to compete in that realm, you don’t need a factory, you don’t need any kind of instructure that costs more than a few thousands bucks. You need hands-on skills and maybe some friends who work in this area that have complementary skills. If you’re looking at digital fashion, some of the most impressive work has been done by indie designers, not by the big luxury brands. So it really shows you that you can do stuff without having a one-billion dollar revenue and a massive conglomerate behind you.

So how can designers get involved in this?

Skills are key, unfortunately, because it’s the hardest thing – besides being born with a lot of money. I think those skills are things that you are now starting to get in schools, but you don’t really need to go to a fashion school for that. You’re not gonna get the skill level that’s gonna make you competitive in fashion school. Luckily it’s something that you can learn online for free. Software is not expensive, especially individual licenses. Basically in the same way that you could be good at pattern cutting, you need to learn 3D and digital pattern cutting, you need to learn animation and CGI.

“People play games, people use augmented reality. So the more realistic these environments become, the more you want to have these realistic representations of garments in them. ” – Assaf Reeb

Maybe let’s go for a practical example. Let’s say there’s a garment, not majorly complex – what is the process like?

It really depends on the garment, and the resources that we have. Ideally we have access to the actual garment, which is often possible. Then what we do is a combination of low-tech and high-tech. A lot about it is knowing how clothes are made. Basically reverse engineering the pattern, that’s done through measurements, through taking pictures and through some other means. We’re basically recreating the 2D pattern of the garment as accurately as possible. Then we do a simulation, fit it on an avatar, texture it, create shaders – which is how virtual materials are made – and then it’s basically being put in a game engine. A game engine is distinguished from other kinds of 3D software in that it creates real-time imagery. Think of it in contrast to you as a person watching a movie on a screen: the movie just goes linearly. Versus you’re in a gameworld and you can choose where you want to go and what you will do; this is the difference.

When you’re thinking about visual effects or a lot of concept art that people look at, or digital fashion, this is not something that runs in real-time. It’s been pre-rendered, or made offline, in a way. You were asking what’s the future, and I gave you an example of what I think is a dream scenario, but it’s very much a real scenario. People play games, people use augmented reality. So the more realistic these environments become, the more you want to have these realistic representations of garments in them. What we’re doing is rendering the garment in real-time in the engines, so you’ve got much more control over how you can see stuff. You can walk around it, you can examine different aspects of it. Also the translation from that into a game is easier. So it’s not only about making beautiful imagery, it’s also about making beautiful immersive experiences, where you can really get an insight into how a garment is made. There’s a cyber aesthetic that’s common in digital fashion, it’s often the direction that things take. One of the reasons is that this kind of aesthetic is relatively easy to achieve. It’s much easier to achieve than realism in real-time. But what we’re trying to do is create this real-time, hyper-realistic fashion aesthetic, or an aesthetic that’s more influenced by art and fashion, and bring that with the most cutting edge tools.