Only 40 outfits in a collection?

[Spike413]

The reason why I think the 40 and under number is ideal is because you can combine the stylization aspect with the pieces aspect. It's like, you use all of the statement pieces, the most important items that summarize the message behind the collection and then you use them to create your vision of how they're worn.

Obviously, I don't want to see those statement pieces just over and over again in different colors, it needs to be a mix of impact pieces and staple pieces in one outfit.

Obviously if you have a show with 40 looks made up of completely different pieces, the more there is to wear from it and take in, but since that's practically non-existant...

Beyond 40 becomes way too redundant, I know for me just looking at pictures of an Armani show, I rarely ever finish because it's just overkill. Everything starts to look the same, even when it's not.

 

[style_expert]

Another thing that's nearly nonexistent nowadays is seeing models walk together on runways. Back then, it was commonplace to see models walk in a pair or in a trio on the runway.

Actually Hermes SS07 and Hussein Chalayan SS07 had models walking in a pair or group..I think it's sort of coming back..

 

[Spiral1532]

Maybe I'm just old-school, but I prefer the old format of runway shows, with 100+ outfits in the collection. Fashion shows circa 15 years ago were lavish. Certain shows were a spectacle to watch, with the way that they were staged and choreographed (e.g., Versace, Claude Montana, Thierry Mugler).

With today's format, fashion shows seem so...informal. Even the runways themselves are usually short and narrow.

 

[zamb]

Maybe I'm just old-school, but I prefer the old format of runway shows, with 100+ outfits in the collection. Fashion shows circa 15 years ago were lavish. Certain shows were a spectacle to watch, with the way that they were staged and choreographed (e.g., Versace, Claude Montana, Thierry Mugler).

With today's format, fashion shows seem so...informal. Even the runways themselves are usually short and narrow.

well, we live in a different world now, and things are not as easy as they once were, designers are not making as much money now (well, more money but less profits) as they once were, do you think its by chance that two of the three designers you mentioned no longer do rtw collections and runway shows (at least not on the scale they used to)

fashion today is not what it once was, the old format may or may not have been better, but with everything that is happening now, and also a wider world context (911 disaster, war in iraq , north Korea etc) things that are too extravagant seem careless and out of context. these are largely some of the reasons things are the way they are.
after all, creating all of that clothes for a show, not many of it reaches the , production line much less the selling floor

 

[esquire]

40 looks is ok indeed, otherwise it can be extensive and boring.

I was reading another day that important media like Suzy, Sarah, Colin, Hilary, Hamish, Nicole... sometimes would attend to over 100/150 shows per season - of course the mainstream , lots of others anonimous labels showing off schedule and parallel exhibitions .... that's a lot to take in.

As the show nowadays is mainly for buyer and press , 40 is absolutely fine, the press will get a concise message & mood and the buyer will see all variations in the showroom.

If you take in consideration catwalks in Asia, its still quite long ( like 50 / 75 outfits) and in the end they handle flowers to the designers, its quite old fashion but always sweet.

 

[esquire]

Actually Hermes SS07 and Hussein Chalayan SS07 had models walking in a pair or group..I think it's sort of coming back..

I love the walkng in duo or trio act, but it requires more models, more beauty team, more clothes... therefore more money, this is why I think its quite rare nowadays.

 

[Scott]

I agree completely esquire!

 

[Lena]

come on now, there is no 'big' label with 40 outfits collection, so, why are we even discussing this? most 'established' shows are 70+ outfits which is about 2 changes by model

as far as i know 40 is just the basic minimum in order to secure your show in the calendar

as for me, i sure prefer 'small' shows, they are stronger and they dont bore me, but anything less than 25 outfits is not even considered a 'show' or a collection much more if there is catwalk involved..

 

[esquire]

come on now, there is no 'big' label with 40 outfits collection, so, why are we even discussing this? most 'established' shows are 70+ outfits which is about 2 changes by model

as far as i know 40 is just the basic minimum in order to secure your show in the calendar

as for me, i sure prefer 'small' shows, they are stronger and they dont bore me, but anything less than 25 outfits is not even considered a 'show' or a collection much more if there is catwalk involved..

Sorry Lena,

But i'll disagree with you ,

You don't need have to 40 looks as basic minimum to be in the calendar -- as you can see : Phillip Lim (31 looks) - Ann Demeulemeester (33 looks) - Balenciaga (37 looks ) - Biba (36 looks) - Calvin Klein ( 34 looks) - Comme (37 looks) - Rick Owens (30 looks) etc, etc.. no rules. .... you show how many outfits you think its necessary to represent you idea.

Gareth Pugh just 12 look sand still a "show" considered by style.com

I think you meant just "old designers" have 70+ like JPG, Karl for Chanel, Armani, Valentino - and its is quite rare ....

As Mcqueen, Alberta F., Lanvin, Burburry, Dior, Versace, LV are all "established houses" / "big Labels" and all of them show around 45 / 55 looks nowadays.

 

[Mr-Dale]

I agree esquire... it's seldom that big houses or even the smaller labels show more than 40-50 looks. The only labels that did this, this season were both the Armani's and Dolce & Gabbana if I recall correctly. JPG doesn't count, because he showed two 'collections' in one show: the retrospective (35 looks) and the actual SS 07 collection (48 looks) Plus, we all know how incredibly boring the Armani shows are. I've often heard fashion journalists complain how they would like him to show less in a show. I guess he's just from an older generation and doesn't really adjust to the modern times (perhaps also clothe-wise, but that's another discussion )

I think that shows were cut shorter over the time because fashion weeks became bigger and bigger and with the days became longer and longer... to fit in all these shows that would all have 175 ( ) outfits would be a disaster. Fashion weeks would take 2 weeks if that happened these days (Ny, Paris, Milan...already jampacked now)

Personally, I think 50 looks works best. 30 daylooks, 10 cocktail, 10 evening. Perfect IMO.

 

[Spiral1532]

come on now, there is no 'big' label with 40 outfits collection, so, why are we even discussing this? most 'established' shows are 70+ outfits which is about 2 changes by model

as far as i know 40 is just the basic minimum in order to secure your show in the calendar

I don't know what you consider a "big label". Just now in the S/S 07 collections:
Balenciaga contained only 38 outfits.
Carolina Herrera - 41
Karl Largerfeld - 44
Gucci - 44
YSL - 43

 

[LostInNJ]

I don't believe that there is a minimum or maximum number of outfits a designer has to show on the runway...As mentioned earlier Gareth Pugh showed very few, in addition to a few of the smaller shows that I attended this season; Luca Luca showed 33 looks...(Tom Ford was a master at this IMO) I think part of it also has to do with sampling costs as well. It isn't cheap to put a collection together, let along pay for the models' time for that matter. I didn't realize it before until this topic, but I think around 40 outfits is perfect...It gets the point across, hopefully, and doesn't turn into a movie.

 

[Lena]

Sorry Lena,

But i'll disagree with you ,

You don't need have to 40 looks as basic minimum to be in the calendar -- as you can see : Phillip Lim (31 looks) - Ann Demeulemeester (33 looks) - Balenciaga (37 looks ) - Biba (36 looks) - Calvin Klein ( 34 looks) - Comme (37 looks) - Rick Owens (30 looks) etc, etc.. no rules. .... you show how many outfits you think its necessary to represent you idea.

esquire, you don't seriously think that designers' shows consist only of the pics you see at style.com, do you ?
this is just not the case.. no internet site posts the whole show

 

[LostInNJ]

esquire, you don't seriously think that designers' shows consist only of the pics you see at style.com, do you ?
this is just not the case.. no internet site posts the whole show

I think Style.com does a pretty good job of posting all the pics from the shows. I have only seen a few shows in which not everything was posted.

 

[esquire]

esquire, you don't seriously think that designers' shows consist only of the pics you see at style.com, do you ?
this is just not the case.. no internet site posts the whole show

Hi Lena, you might be confused, but they do, and I'm absolutely sure about it,

- Style.com, Vogue.co.uk, Voguevanity.it, Vogue.fr etc... always publish the integral show.. the quantities of looks is absolutely the same as shown..

What I think you meant is that they don't publish the Full Collection, consisting of showroom pieces ( colourways, lenght/ fabric variations, etc...) as well... but it isn't in the show anyway.

 

[Mr-Dale]

^ I hope that is what you ment as well, Lena... otherwise... wha? We are talking only what is shown during fashion shows, not what's showed in the showroom. And I don't understand how you can think that no internet site puts up the entire show. I've seen enough fashion videos and pictures that proof that (pictures in which we see the next outfit approaching in the back, proving that the next picture is indeed the next outfit)

I'm confused

 

[Lena]

of course there are videos online but have you really checked the style.com photos with the actual videos of the shows begining to end?

until 2 years ago i've been on and off covering Paris collections for magazines and trust me when i checked with style.com the whole collection was certainly not there, only fragments were up at the web (and that includes mcQueen, Valentino, Dries van Notten shows)

as for Ann D. shwing 33 and Balenciaga 37 pieces on catwalk is a bit strange, really, but if you have counted outfits from video, you are obviously right..
in which case excuse my arrogant ignorance..

 

[esquire]

Hi Lena,

Sorry for be intrusive again, i really respect and admire you comments and opinions , but you are supporting a non-true fact.

Just for curiosity , I have checked the Balenciaga website (www.balenciaga.com) and if you go to the link SS07 , you will see that just 37 looks were presented indeed. Please check yourself.

As you I also work for the fashion industry and have attended to several important shows... and always what a saw in the catwalk was exactly what is published in the main fashion websites that write reviews ( style, vogue.. ) .... I'm not considering "Getty Images" or "Yahoo News" as those just show the main pictures


Also if you check catwalking.com or "first view" you'll see that the total number of looks correspond exactly to what Style publishes..

 

[Mr-Dale]

I guess I refuse to believe what you state Lena... it just sounds so pointless to do that And I have often laid style.com slideshows next to vids (I always do it to Dior for instance, did it to Burberry, Chanel when they had vids, Viktor & Rolf, Galliano, both Hussein Chalayan and Proenza Schouler recently) never did I discover a glitch.

 

[Lena]

mrDale, i have no reason to lie, do i?

anyway, i already accepted your point, since i dont check out videos and their accordance with style.com pics , i've even apologised for my misleaded opinion already..

will you please stop grilling me now ?
thanks