SomethingElse
Press escape to continue.
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2007
- Messages
- 5,444
- Reaction score
- 0
... but cost and complexity keep most off the market
What if someone invented an "invisible fabric" - material that would be camouflaged by projecting an image of whatever scene shifts behind it? Imagine how a designer might use this optical illusion if, say, a dress's outer edges could be made "invisible," producing extreme silhouettes that were not previously possible.
No longer would the designer be limited to a body's measurements for garment proportions. If such "invisible panels" could make a woman appear far slimmer than her real figure, imagine how much they would be worth to the brand that trademarks the method.
Susumu Tachi, a professor at the University of Tokyo, unveiled exactly such a camouflage technique, called the Transparent Cloak, five years ago, but the fashion designer needed to apply this retroreflective technology has yet to materialize.
A host of high-tech developments has recently come out of scientific laboratories, start-ups or academic researchers in need of the kind of experimentation, refinement and craftsmanship that only fashion's most talented designers can give. The fact that many of these innovations often emerge from chemistry, engineering or other fields - far from the sound of stilettos pounding on a runway - means that, aside from very notable exceptions, few of these prototypes and trial technologies have been made into products.
"Contrary to popular belief, the fashion world is, in fact, quite conservative," says Suzanne Lee, author of "Fashioning the Future: Tomorrow's Wardrobe," which features Tachi's invention and other pioneering discoveries. "In such a highly competitive and high-stakes industry, it doesn't pay to be too far ahead. Just far enough to be seen to push boundaries, but not so far as to alienate consumers."
And while the fashion establishment can be slow to catch on, the greater public can be even more plodding. "Both investors and consumers prefer small leaps to great bounds," says Lee. "Fashion by its very nature is transient. There is no incentive to invest in ideas that have any longevity."
But at least one famous name does check all the boxes. Over the last year, Hussein Chalayan has been exploring the use of embedded microcomputers, engineered pulley systems and electroluminescent textiles to create dresses that can change shape or display abstract light-emitting diode (LED) films through their fabric.
"Ironically, the hard thing is working with companies or organizations that actually can help you develop these related technologies," Chalayan says. "You can only do them as prototypes and when you try to produce them on a bigger scale, you're limited because then the manufacturers don't want to take risks."
So Chalayan's creations, which mutate from 21st-century interpretations of iconic Edwardian restraint into liberated flapper-era party dresses with the flick of switch, are relegated to catwalk gimmicks. Even though he has collaborated with one of the world's most eclectic prototyping studios to produce the samples, he has yet to find a manufacturer capable or willing to adapt them to ready-to-wear.
The technology, which is embedded into corsets and pads under fabric, is still cumbersome, but without further experimentation by fashion designers and manufacturers, a more streamlined version for repeat production will remain elusive, according to the studio that turned Chalayan's sketches into catwalk outfits, 2D3D.
"I don't think anybody could take it on as it stands. It would be too expensive and too labor intensive," says Rob Edkins, director of 2D3D, a London studio that built Chalayan's prototypes and that normally works with automobile and furniture companies. "Until it's more cost effective, they will have to stay one-offs. Eighty percent of our costs to build the show samples went into the research and development."
Costs vary widely, but, for example, Tachi has said that the research and development cost of his cloak material was about $3 million.
The Catch-22 facing designers is that the only way to bring down the cost of such experimental garments would be increasing investment in research and development, something most do not have the budgets to do. But cost is not the only prohibitive factor.
"Fashion aesthetics are quite complicated and usually retrospective rather than prospective, more backward looking than forward thinking. So it's unlikely that everyone would get on the technological bandwagon," says Chloe Colchester, author of "Textiles Today: A Global Survey of Trends and Traditions."
Lee agrees: "Designers tend to be more akin to artists than engineers and this means research tends to focus on the aesthetic end of the scale not the technical."
The designer Paul Smith, says: "The fabrics that we use are for everyday use, mostly in cities, so generally speaking we don't tend to be using high-tech fabrics. The only area that I would specifically look to use these fabrics would be maybe in my jeans line and elements of casual clothing in some of my other lines.
iht.com . published 2 October 2007
Last edited by a moderator: