Clothier Slammed For Using 'Perfect' Virtual Model

Hugh Pickens writes "Swedish Clothing Giant H&M recently disclosed that the images from the company's website, showing models wearing the latest swimsuit and lingerie in generic, stock-form, are not just photoshopped but entirely computer-generated. 'We take pictures of the clothes on a doll that stands in the shop, and then create the human appearance with a program on [a] computer,' H&M press officer Hacan Andersson said when questioned about the company's picture-perfect online models. Advertising watchdogs elevated the controversy by criticizing the chain of lower-cost clothing stores for their generic approach to models, accusing the chain of creating unrealistic physical ideals. 'This illustrates very well the sky-high aesthetic demands placed on the female body,' says a spokesman for the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation, one of the groups most critical of H&M. 'The demands are so great that H&M, among the poor photo models, cannot find someone with both body and face that can sell their bikinis.'"

Robot indicator missing

[zAPPzAPP]

Artifical humans are required to show their robot indicator hologram at all times.
It may only be switched off by court order. This is clearly a violation.

Re:Cheaper

[Anonymous Coward]

They aren't far away, especially in japan.

Re:Cheaper

[svendsen]

Sheep herding?

Re:This is an issue for women

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

OK, I'll use a car analogy. All the cars on the commercials have a great wax job and no dirt or water spots, and they're always shot in great light. How come I can never get my car to look like that?

Re:Cheaper

[Gravitron 5000]

You've been a Baa-aa-aa-aa-aad boy.

Re:Cheaper

[elrous0]

If the movie Looker [wikipedia.org] is any indication, this can only end in a lot of deaths and a nude scene with Susan Dey.

Re:Cheaper

[netwarerip]

Not nearly as creepy as a crawl-space full of them. Um, I mean, someone else's crawl-space full of them.

Re:Robot indicator missing

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean like a big glittery "H" on their forehead?

Re:This is an issue for women

[Dyinobal]

To continue using your analogy. Your car wouldn't let you drive it if it looked that good, so be glad it doesn't less you lose your ride.

More real than real?

[Shoten]

Look at it this way...the virtual models are more likely to pass a Turing test than the real ones...

Re:Cheaper

[thunderclap]

The same thing they did prior to photography's invention: fellatio

Re:Cheaper

[shish]

It's about making the process much shorter and cheaper. I don't see anyone complaining for the mannequins not being human beings

When I was walking through Amsterdam, I saw a lot of live underwear models in the shop windows; seemed quite a popular and successful concept...

Re:Cheaper

[Belial6]

Years ago, I worked in a Software Etc. It was right next door to a popular women's clothing store. At lunch, I would walk over to eat at a restaurant across form the stores. Sitting there watching the stores was truly enlightening. The difference in how men shop and how women shop became entirely clear:

In the clothing store...
The women would slowly walk between the displays. Frequently putting their hand out and very lightly run it along the selection of products. Periodically, they would pull out an item. They would look it up and down, inspecting it from all angles. Then they would put it back on the display. All the while the man that came with them would follow them with a board blank stare.

Whereas, in the Software store...
The men would slowly walk between the displays. Frequently putting their hand out and very lightly run it along the selection of products. Periodically, they would pull out an item. They would look it up and down, inspecting it from all angles. Then they would put it back on the display. All the while the woman that came with them would follow them with a board blank stare.

RTFA

[SST-206]

At last! A /. story where everyone is guaranteed to RTFA! ;-)