Hacker News Reader

Comment by ShabbyDoo | Hacker News Reader

I once saw a TV segment showing some starlet being photographed for a print clothing ad campaign. The stylist used metal clips (the sort one can buy at an office supply store for holding 50 sheets of paper together) to tighten the garment around her torso. From the front, the dress looked like it fit her perfectly. However, the back exposed a bunch of black metal clips holding back fabric. How does such an ad compare ethically to the specially-made McDonald's burger? A woman with the same measurements buying that same garment would not look as good as the starlet being photographed.

View on HN

I do a bit of a photography on the side and know a few working fashion photographers. Generally when you're supplied clothing from a company it'll come as a specific size, say size 8. You put out a casting call for a size 8 model that meets your specific requirements, and find that the clothes are too big for her due to sizing being weird. You then have to style it so it looks perfect and go from there, it's not so much about fake it to make it look more perfect (that's what gratuitous liquify is for) but to Get The Job Done.

Someone with the exact same measurements generally has the benefit of being able to try the different sizes on, photographers often don't unless working with a company rep on hand, or they've sent multiple sizes which often only happens at the higher end.

I understand and support these tools and "tricks of the trade" when it comes to fashion shoots. My understanding and expectation of fashion shoots is to show what is possible instead of showing what is being sold.

However, I find the practice misleading in catalogs and in-store displays. The expectation in catalogs is to present the wares the seller is advertising. Using clips and pins misrepresents the product.

I really appreciate transparency and clarity in exactly how a garment is cut. Some sellers accomplish this wonderfully. One such seller is Mr. Porter. On their online catalog, you can see that some garments do not fit perfectly on the model because that is simply how the garment naturally hangs without clips/pin/tailoring. They also give the model's measurements so that you can compare your sizes to the models and a size chart. This has been enough for me to accurately judge how a garment will fit me even without trying it on! (Example: http://www.mrporter.com/product/301852 , select "Size & Fit"). Another website that does this is Amazon's myhabit.com

I don't mind GQ using clips and pins. GQ is presenting what is possible. A store, on the other hand, should show what they are trying to sell, and I believe using clips misrepresents their wares by obscuring the exact nature of their wares: sizing, cut, how it hangs, what would have to be tailored, etc.

All the mens shirting still photos you see are shot in this manner. If you were to wear shirts that fitted so snugly, you might not even be able to move or breath.

Not sure about in the US, but in the UK you often see store mannequins "dressed" the same way.

In the US as well. Typically shirts and suits to give a "slimmed" appearance.

That sounds like more of a shortcut than anything. Clothes are available in a variety of sizes, and it's just faster to clips than it is to figure out exactly what size this model needs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com