Modeclix; digital craftsmanship and fashion.

An exploration of constructing garments using 3D printing poses many challenges, not least the fluidity of the ‘textiles’ created by 3D printed materials and their relationship to the body. The opportunities 3D printing presents to this process for producing garments allow for complex construction techniques that defy traditional pattern cutting to create garments that are multi-functional and customisable.

The potential allows for the construction of garments that are printed to create fluid pieces that, on paper, do not conform to a body shape, but when worn are transformed to augment the natural curves of the wearer. This project considers how traditional pattern cutting and draping can be combined with technology to redefine the perception of textiles and, ultimately, the wearer.

The first challenge, and perhaps the most exciting one, is to define and overcome the parameters that one is confronted with when trying to mimic woven and/or knitted textiles from which to make a garment. The obvious limits with this technology include the materials that can currently be processed using 3D printing technology. While there are a number of generic 3D printing processes commercially available, each capable of processing different materials, this project is focused on the Laser Sintering (LS) process and Nylon material. In this case, transforming a white powder into a textile is not dissimilar, in thinking at least, to that of spinning silk from a silkworm. Achieving similar outcomes, however, poses a greater challenge. Silk can obviously be transformed into a woven or knitted textile that is pliable, drapable and fluid. The nylon powder utilised by the LS 3D printing process, by nature, does not have the same properties as silk. It comes out of the printer in a solid state despite the capability of including movement that is defined through the use of the software.

As a prerequisite to the printing process, the printed objects are first designed, or “built,” in a digital environment using 3D modelling software where complex algorithms can be used to formulate and define the desired outcome. However, due to the limitations of the materials, the flexibility and fluidity found in natural textiles is limited, possibly non-existent.  In addition, working within the limitations of a small print bed[i], constrains what can and cannot be done. For example, simulations of the textile and how it conforms to the available print space must be undertaken as the direction of each printed component must remain the same — much like working with the warp and weft of a woven piece of cloth. This adds to the complexity of the design process.

There are a number of examples that illustrate how designers have used 3D printing to create ‘garments,’ with limited success, as a result of the materials used. Most notably Iris Van Herpen and design brand Nervous System have both utilised the technology in their design work despite the challenges that they face. However, it could be said that the items they print are not particularly wearable. In the case of Iris Van Herpen, her garments are, in the main, solid with little to no movement at all.  The designers at Nervous System have created a dress that achieves movement through the creation of highly complex geometry that allows them to print multiple, hinged moving parts.

Creating 3D textiles that are flexible with movement that mimics traditional cloth and is seen as integral to a garment as opposed to an embellishment is crucial to this research as it ensures that the garments are wearable but at the same time addressing both traditional methods of garment construction and existing technology and advances in the development of materials.

In the first instance, the project focuses on an interpretation of weave and knit. The initial prototypes are 3D printed as pieces of textile that have enough movement to ensure that they are fluid and represent a textile that can be used to make a garment. The focus is on movement; how the textile drapes and responds to manipulation in relation to the creation of a pattern of a garment that flows over the body of the wearer and is, at the same time, comfortable to wear.

The potential to create customisable garments is enormous. The pieces can then be dyed in an endless spectrum of colours, another area of research and investigation that moves away from current limited use of, for example, black and white. Working on a dress making stand, employing traditional methods of drape rather than flat pattern cutting techniques, emphasises the idea of working in 3D albeit in different ways; through the use of 3D CAD and the physical object. Component pieces can be assembled in ways that allow for intricate and often surprising outcomes of pattern, drape and construction.

take a look at Molly makes a dress the fashion film about the process.

1 The limitations of the print bed size are an integral part of the research despite large 3D printers being available as smaller print beds are easily accessed providing the possibility of rapid manufacture for mass production.

---

[i]

Modeclix; digital craftsmanship and fashion.

An exploration of constructing garments using 3D printing poses many challenges, not least the fluidity of the ‘textiles’ created by 3D printed materials and their relationship to the body. The opportunities 3D printing presents to this process for producing garments allow for complex construction techniques that defy traditional pattern cutting to create garments that are multi-functional and customisable.

The potential allows for the construction of garments that are printed to create fluid pieces that, on paper, do not conform to a body shape, but when worn are transformed to augment the natural curves of the wearer. This project considers how traditional pattern cutting and draping can be combined with technology to redefine the perception of textiles and, ultimately, the wearer.

The first challenge, and perhaps the most exciting one, is to define and overcome the parameters that one is confronted with when trying to mimic woven and/or knitted textiles from which to make a garment. The obvious limits with this technology include the materials that can currently be processed using 3D printing technology. While there are a number of generic 3D printing processes commercially available, each capable of processing different materials, this project is focused on the Laser Sintering (LS) process and Nylon material. In this case, transforming a white powder into a textile is not dissimilar, in thinking at least, to that of spinning silk from a silkworm. Achieving similar outcomes, however, poses a greater challenge. Silk can obviously be transformed into a woven or knitted textile that is pliable, drapable and fluid. The nylon powder utilised by the LS 3D printing process, by nature, does not have the same properties as silk. It comes out of the printer in a solid state despite the capability of including movement that is defined through the use of the software.

As a prerequisite to the printing process, the printed objects are first designed, or “built,” in a digital environment using 3D modelling software where complex algorithms can be used to formulate and define the desired outcome. However, due to the limitations of the materials, the flexibility and fluidity found in natural textiles is limited, possibly non-existent.  In addition, working within the limitations of a small print bed[i], constrains what can and cannot be done. For example, simulations of the textile and how it conforms to the available print space must be undertaken as the direction of each printed component must remain the same — much like working with the warp and weft of a woven piece of cloth. This adds to the complexity of the design process.

There are a number of examples that illustrate how designers have used 3D printing to create ‘garments,’ with limited success, as a result of the materials used. Most notably Iris Van Herpen and design brand Nervous System have both utilised the technology in their design work despite the challenges that they face. However, it could be said that the items they print are not particularly wearable. In the case of Iris Van Herpen, her garments are, in the main, solid with little to no movement at all.  The designers at Nervous System have created a dress that achieves movement through the creation of highly complex geometry that allows them to print multiple, hinged moving parts.

Creating 3D textiles that are flexible with movement that mimics traditional cloth and is seen as integral to a garment as opposed to an embellishment is crucial to this research as it ensures that the garments are wearable but at the same time addressing both traditional methods of garment construction and existing technology and advances in the development of materials.

In the first instance, the project focuses on an interpretation of weave and knit. The initial prototypes are 3D printed as pieces of textile that have enough movement to ensure that they are fluid and represent a textile that can be used to make a garment. The focus is on movement; how the textile drapes and responds to manipulation in relation to the creation of a pattern of a garment that flows over the body of the wearer and is, at the same time, comfortable to wear.

The potential to create customisable garments is enormous. The pieces can then be dyed in an endless spectrum of colours, another area of research and investigation that moves away from current limited use of, for example, black and white. Working on a dress making stand, employing traditional methods of drape rather than flat pattern cutting techniques, emphasises the idea of working in 3D albeit in different ways; through the use of 3D CAD and the physical object. Component pieces can be assembled in ways that allow for intricate and often surprising outcomes of pattern, drape and construction.

take a look at Molly makes a dress the fashion film about the process.

1 The limitations of the print bed size are an integral part of the research despite large 3D printers being available as smaller print beds are easily accessed providing the possibility of rapid manufacture for mass production.

---

[i]

Interview with Lou Dalton

Lou Dalton Spring Summer 14

S
Tell us a bit about how you started out.

Lou Dalton
I left school at 16. I come from a little town
called Market Drayton in Shropshire. I wasn’t particularly interested in school and decided to leave with a handful of GCSE’s to take up an apprenticeship with a bespoke tailor which was part of a scheme called YTS, the Youth Training Scheme. It was a fantastic opportunity and I decided to 
take that because I didn’t feel like school was offering me anything.


L
I didn’t have the desire to go on any further in Higher Education so I chose to take up this role. 
I wasn’t really sure at that the time if I was being drawn by a yearning to be in fashion. I did 
not know what it was really like because the tailor I was working for, called Arthur Pardington, 
was producing shooting gear for the likes of Purdey
and Sons in London. I was exposed to everything at a very formal level and not really fashion 
design related. I suppose the only way I was exposed
to a more glamorous side of fashion was when I was in a doctor’s surgery and seeing a Vogue 
magazine on a table.

So I chose to do this and was not really sure how it was going to balance out. I learnt to be like 
a sponge, as if it were a part of my DNA. I yearned for fashion and working for a man as talented as Arthur, being exposed to all the skills I feel are really important in fashion, i.e. design, pattern cutting and construction, at that age was incredible really.

When I started working for him, I was a YTS apprentice at the age of 16 and at that time I had two groups of friends. One of which was quite rebellious and the other group that was very much into study and pursuing what was seen as the normal route through education, GCSEs, ‘A’ Levels, Foundation, which may have been the right way to do things.

S
You’re obviously a menswear designer. Why menswear when most designers tend to veer towards women’s wear?

L
It was just because at the time I started working for Pardy Clothing it was pretty much all that was going through the door. That’s what I was being exposed to so it just felt like second nature. I was always very much a tomboy and always gravitated to that kind of thing. It was being exposed to these amazing cloths, Prince of Wales checks or shooting Tweeds and that kind of thing. It just felt so right and as you say I was a woman in a male dominated area of work but it didn’t really come into it. I felt that I can do this.

S
Tell us a little about your skills, you know the kind of skills you need for designing men’s or women’s wear.

L
It’s quite interesting because I think sometimes what people believe fashion to be is very different from the reality. The design aspect feels very minimal in comparison to creating and designing a collection and for me the practical side is key over everything. Having those skills; being able to sew from an early age, construct and understand how a garment is put together, being able to then pattern cut that, then develop that, makes you a better and stronger designer because you know the skeleton form. Instead of just sitting there and being able to design a pretty picture you can go into a factory and explain to them exactly what you want. To me that’s the core of it and having those skills I was kind of hell bent on that. In a way, I suppose, I came in from a more practical angle.

I get asked myself, how do you transfer that into design? You have this little narrative in your 
mind and it’s just a process that comes like a natural form really.

S
Talk us through the process. Some people start with the cloth, others the sketch or some other form of inspiration. What is your process?

L
When I first started this, and it has evolved although I have less time now, I used to be able to go off to a gallery. You also might be walking around town or you’ll be on holiday and there will be an idea. That for me is a starting point, a concept which is integral to building a collection. Then I start to think about the colour, the fabric and obviously start researching depending on the season, whether it is Autumn Winter or Spring Summer. Then you start to build a mood board.

There’s a constant link from the aesthetic to the fabric and then we will start to think about a form and what kind of silhouette and obviously, although it’s your own aesthetic, I do a lot of research into past collections which worked for us. I also look at things which have historically sold for us and think actually I quite liked that and maybe I should touch on that again. You have
to be aware of trends and what other designers are doing. It’s important to do that, but not 
necessarily emulate it because you want a point of difference that makes you stand out from 
everybody else.

I think it’s also important to look at designers from the past so you can pull from that and a good
body of research is core to a good collection.

S
How do you maintain the Lou Dalton aesthetic?

L
It’s quite difficult sometimes and of late, well over the last four seasons, I chose to work with a stylist, because sometimes you’re in your own little bubble. You can get quite caught up in that and it’s very easy to do what you want to do and actually ignore what is right for your customer
or brand that you’re trying to build. Even though we’re not on the same level as Dries Van Noten or Raf Simons who also have a strong client base, we need to able to build and get folk on board, and as a consumer we need to be able to build an identity. If you go back to the drawing board and try to redesign the wheel then any client that has come on one season may drop off the next. So to me it is important that there is a thread. To make your collection seem relevant as a young brand, buyers want to support you but find it difficult unless they can see it fitting alongside the bigger brands which they are stocking.

S
You started five years ago. You’re selling internationally. Is it important that you are a British designer selling something that has that heritage?

Lou Dalton Spring Summer 14

L
I used to think it was really important but as a consumer and designer I like products that feel honest and well constructed and live up to what has been said about them. I think that the feedback we have had to date is that the product stands alone. We’re not having to force the fact that I’m British. I do think it is important, especially in Japan and equally the in the States.
I think folk want value for money and if the quality doesn’t back that up it doesn’t matter what 
you do or who you are, they just start to move away from it, they’re not interested.

S
How involved are you in the complete process? Do you see everything through?

L
I was talking to my assistant the other day actually, saying that the admin side, looking after the cash flow, I find really quite frustrating because I enjoy the practical side. If times were harsh and we had to bring it all in house I could do absolutely everything. That’s because it is part of my DNA. I know if a factory is trying to pull the wool over my eyes then I’m there straight away.
At the end of the day you’re bartering constantly to get a good price and quality and unfortunately some designers don’t care and just want to get the product out there. If I want longevity in the industry I have to back it up.

S
Tell us a bit about your Knitwear? I know a lot of it is made in England.

L
It is. It’s all made in the UK. Originally folk used to touch on it and say Lou Dalton Knitwear designer but actually I’m not. I just have a good understanding of knit and what I like. I think the taste level is more to do with it. I used to work for a Japanese company called United Arrows and I was asked to produce a range of knitwear for them in Shetland and Scotland. It was great actually. They did all the ground work and I just had to go visit them and tell them what we wanted. I built up this portfolio of certain factories and a great relationship with them. When I
did start Lou Dalton I was able to tap into that resource. Then I work with a lady in the South of 
England who is phenomenal. She’ll then do all the swatches after I have briefed her. This is
the design development because I can’t actually physically knit. That’s how I work.

Lou Dalton Spring Summer 14

S
A lot of labels have started to introduce bespoke or limited edition labels. Is that something you might do?

L
There are two more stores in London which we would like to sell to but we don’t. For one
in particular the collection is not right for them but their proposal to us was to create a 
special, something exclusive to them; a T-Shirt line or something like that. It’s important because it’s one way we might be able to do something that doesn’t compromise the Lou Dalton aesthetic.

S
Is it important to be able to use social media?

L
It is important. We get a lot of coverage on Blogs, there are a lot of bloggers out there. A lot of backstage footage is so instant and it’s great that it reaches so many people, so fast. I have great PR and they will get me to answer questions and then it will be fired out to the blogger and they’ll put it up. I would rather be on the sewing machine or doing the more practical things I suppose.

S
Tell me a little bit about the preparation for Fashion Week.

L
It sounds all so glamorous but the core of what we do is to get clothes on people’s backs, to get that chap on the street to buy what we do, and that whole process behind that is to produce a collection that a store will come and buy. We have just completed that, so obviously the collection for wholesale isn’t quite ready for fashion week because there are a few bells and whistles that you want to add to draw press to get a little bit of attention. When I wholesale a collection I don’t produce twenty one pairs of trousers, it’s more like eight, so we have to produce additional pieces. That’s the first thing we do. A collection comes back from Paris and I sit down with my stylist and work out the finishing touches. Then we’ll start considering boys who we’re going to have model. This is important because getting the aesthetic across in a couple of minutes is really quite tough. If you have the wrong chap it can make a massive difference. We get a lot of support. The British Fashion Council have been extremely supportive and so have Top Man. When I first started it felt quite daunting but now I say bring it on and we’ll have a go.

S
How different is the collection you show to the collection you sell?

L
Not too different. I know there are various designers out there, huge brands, who have separate collections but we’re not a big enough machine to do that. I can’t afford to do it, I have a very tight budget and I quite often say to the stylist you can have one special jacket because it’s all I can allow. It’s more accessories that we add than garments really.

S
Tell us a bit about one of your earlier collections

L
I always try to have a thread running through. One of my last collections had a sense of military. The concept was basically this. I grew up in Shropshire and I spent a lot of time at my
grandmothers’ farm and during the Second World War there were a lot of farm estates in the UK. There were Military bases built in and around them and my Grandmother’s farm was like that. The long and the short of it was that a G.I. comes over and falls in love with a land girl and he doesn’t want to go back and he goes AWOL. It was about her disguising the fact that this boy is living there and she is pulling from her father’s wardrobe. So it was a kind of oversized military feel.

S
How do you select the colours?

L
Once again I work with a mill in the north and we are sponsored by this mill. I go up every season and I go through their archive and collection and  quite often, along with the concept in mind, that will become the foundation to the colour palette. Very often it’s about gut instinct and what feels right for Lou Dalton.

Lou Dalton Spring Summer 14

Lou Dalton’s website is www.loudalton.com and she can be found on Twitter @TheLouDalton
Photographs by www.catwalking.com
.

Interview with Stephen Jones

Stephen Jones is undoubtedly one of the most prolific milliners today. He has collaborated with some of the biggest names in fashion including Dior, Vivienne Westwood, L'Wren Scott and Louis Vuitton. His work has been featured in an exhibition by the V & A - Hats: an Anthology by Stephen Jones - that has recently completed a 'world tour'.

Stephen talks to me about luxury:

No Entry

Stephen (SJ): For me, luxury can appear in many ways. It’s only sometimes that it’s an object. You could have a luxurious experience, like a luxurious meal. But, as people say, ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder’, so is luxury in the eye of the beholder. In the early 21^st century people tend to think that it’s a crocodile handbag and it can be that, but normally it’s everything else. Luxury is a very convenient thing to hang something on. I think it sort of the level of affluence and sophistication in society. If you think in terms of post-war, for example, if you had a vacuum cleaner, that was a modern home improvement and that was considered the great luxury of the day, as part of for example a space-age kitchen. And that was sort of the whole idea of an American convenience. Whether it was a convenient fridge or a washing machine, the woman was normally there in front of her Kelvinator washing machine with a ball gown, long gloves and a tiara. So that was absolute luxury. That was convenience. And then came fashion, and suddenly, the new added value word was ‘fashionable’. And along with that was the idea of a fashionable food or a fashionable description. So for example at Marks and Spencer’s you would never have six cakes, you would have a medley of cakes or that kind of thing. 

Luxury nowadays is maybe more true luxury than it was, but it’s still just really a marketing tool. I think that people’s appreciation of luxury is so personal. For one person, luxury may be getting half an hour off work earlier. Within all the luxury brands, really the only one that comes from fashion is Dior. All the others came from saddlery, or leather goods, or whatever. That in fact is slightly a problem for Dior but also its saving, because they haven’t got a thousand different handbags to fall back on. The thing about Dior was novelty. The fact that you had it was just extraordinary luxury and a fantastic, wonderful thing, but you had to have a new one every season. Dior also invented that. But that’s not enough in today’s market. 

SB: How would you define luxury?

SJ: I think something which has had time. If we are talking about an object then time, design, and whatever has been spent on it to make it an evocation of the human condition. Probably aspiring to be making something beautiful and qualitative. Luxury is in the idea contained within the object. I think it is completely about the experience. For example Dior haute couture, the fitters will go and see the client at home; even if it's only on the other side of the road. There will be the directrice of haute couture; the fitter, there may be a sowing lady as well. So it's completely about the experience for the client. The whole thing is about how you want to look, what flatters you, the message you want to send. Couture is just the same experience as they have within Savile Row, of having a bespoke suit made.

SB: Does the experience differ from that of Bond Street for example?

SJ: Well, the experience in Bond Street can be absolutely fantastic as well, like going to a jeweller, or going to a designer boutique; you will really be looked after. However, that product will not be changed for you, whereas luxury is having the thing adapted to your needs really, or to your wishes, to your taste.

SB: If you are buying haute couture, do you meet the designer, for example, and is that important?

SJ: If you are buying Dior haute couture, it depends who you are. You might meet the designer, absolutely, and certainly the designer will be doing the sketches and supervising it, but whether he can actually be there and be particularly hands on is another question... most designers don’t see the clients, and never have done, because actually within the couture houses, the vendeuse, the sales lady, is the one who really rules in that situation and they will have their own clients, and they will have commission from sales from their clients as well.

SB: Do you think it's important to have contact with the maker if you are buying into this idea of luxury rather than a luxury brand?

Vapour Trails

SJ: Oh yes, absolutely. Whether it's having a Porsche done for you in the colour that you want. Normally when we buy a product, the product exists and if we like it we buy it, and if we don’t like it, we don’t buy it. Actually, often even if we don’t like it we still do buy it because it's convenient. But the thing about true luxury therefore, and slightly in conclusion, is that it's halfway your thing and its halfway the person making it for you. And the interesting point is how far you go and how far they go. So it is a creative process, but with somebody in mind. And that exists in all levels. For example if a woman goes to a hairdresser she has got something that is done specifically for her. That’s why people will spend a fortune going to a hairdresser and give a giant tip, because it is that personal service.

SB: Is luxury about re-invention?

SJ: It can be. If you look at a lot of those luxury brands, what they do is they use their heritage. All of them, in particular people like Gucci. They will use their archives. I think every designer does. It's so funny, because you think that during the early sixties every designer or whatever was trying to do something space-age. Now they are desperately trying to look into their archives. They are incredibly proud of that. Burberry has existed since 1856; Dior has existed since 1947. The history of the company is more important than the newness of the object.

SB: What about the celebrity and luxury?

SJ: Interestingly here, for those people who are buying real luxury objects, if a celebrity is wearing it, they don’t want to have it. Often what they are about is discretion not celebrity. It's a private luxury, something to enjoy at home with your family or with your friends. I know some very wealthy people and they go out of their way to make sure that they are not photographed.

SB: What role has history played in that luxury is understood today?

SJ: Well, the ingredients in luxury; there’s craftsmanship, and there is authenticity, and so this whole idea that this thing has been passed down from father to son, and because of that it's a good thing. It's a connection to a time which was maybe slower or more time was spent in the creation of a beautiful object. If you look at companies like Burberry or Brioni, particularly menswear of course, and the Savile Row book, The Perfect Gentleman: The Pursuit of Timeless Elegance & Style in London, by James Sherwood, it is about their history. Today luxury is not about the fact that they are going to make an outfit for the man on the moon, but it's all about ‘heritage brands’, which is a particularly British thing and of course related to history.

SB: What does authenticity mean then, within the context of luxury?

SJ: It means that, within a luxury product, authenticity means that it's made using a traditional technique, which is perceived as being high class, and having soul within it.

SB: Do you think celebrity has a role to play in defining luxury?

SJ: : Yes because if Daphne Guinness is walking around with her new Dior handbag there are a whole lot of people out there who will go and buy it because they think she is a tastemaker. They will go and buy what she has. It is very similar now as it always has been. If you look at printed archives from the 1920s or the 1930s, it's always the Marchioness of Cholmondeley wearing a Vionnet ball gown, or it will say something like ‘She will always go to the White House in Piccadilly to buy her fine bed linens.’

SB: What about celebrity endorsement?

SJ: Celebrities are paid for celebrity endorsement; they have been here for a very long time. I think, what happened is that in the last century there was this sense of decorum about it, which happened probably in the fifties, sixties and seventies, but that all got blown away by the revolution in media in the eighties really, when suddenly you knew that Raquel Welch advertised Timotei Shampoo. She was getting paid for it, whereas before when the Marchioness of Cholmondeley was saying how divine Simpson’s was, it wasn't a hard sell. And then suddenly, of course now we know that everything is paid for.

SB:  Any funny stories you may wish to share?

SJ: There was a wonderful story about Mr. John who was a famous milliner in New York in the early sixties. He draped a turban on a famous client. It was like a scarf and he draped it all up and he fastened it with a big pin; a big brooch on the front. He handed the client a bill, and it was $100, and this was in 1963 or something; $100 was a fortune at that time. And the client said ‘ I am not paying that,’ and made a real stink, and there were other clients there, and they were all listening. He was really embarrassed, and he just undid and he said ‘Madam, the fabric is for free, You make it!’

I Was A Rich Mans Plaything

Electrobloom - Blooming Marvelous

I know I normally write about how luxury brands are destroying what luxury is really about.

This post is a slight departure for me. It is about exploring different approaches to manufacture utilizing emerging technologies, minimizing wasteful production and as Electrobloom suggests 'making things especially for you'. Such a cool concept!

These pieces were made for me!

In a previous post I wrote about mass customization - Prada and Louis Vuitton are all on the case - but what they offer, unless you have something specially made, is component parts that are already made and assembled to order. What is different about Electrobloom is that every piece of amazing jewellery is made to order by Shapeways using some of the most advanced manufacturing methods around. I tested it out - I ordered loads of stuff out of pure indecision - and because I really loved it all. I bought a couple of bangles for myself - I think they are simple and cool enough to be worn by guys and girls - and some fantastic 'blooms' as a gift. They arrived within 4 days!!! And I must say they are amazing.

I really think that this is the future of retail. 

Conglomerates Kill Luxury

News that PPR are looking to buy Brioni strikes a sour note. What were once considered world class purveyors of luxury goods have mostly become consumed by the luxury brand conglomerates in France. LVMH, Richemont, PPR etc dominate retail with the intention of global domination.

Before LVMH, Richemont and PPR came along Louis Vuitton, Christian Dior, Cartier and even Hermes were in essence makers of the finest goods money could buy. Hermes is, much to their understandable annoyance, sadly, slowly being absorbed by LVMH. What we are left with is more product, less real expertise and a myriad of stuff that are fashion led seasonal offerings with a splash of tat. Hermes sell playing cards, Louis Vuitton selling city guides and a Dior (not Christian Dior anymore) website dedicated to make-up.

I do feel that the continued expansion of luxury brands does nothing other than diminish the integrity of the product in order to satisfy the shareholders demand for increased dividends and ultimately, probably, bigger yachts and more plastic surgery.

Product diversification diminishes the inherent value of producing luxury products. As I have said before luxury is not something that can be mass produced or consumed. It feels a bit like a comic book film where world domination is the aim - hopefully in this case the villains won't succeed - although I must admit that it is unlikely unless more heroes join the battle for real luxury .

Where to with Luxury

The Millward Brown brand report has an interesting section on Luxury – well it’s not luxury at all rather an interesting section on luxury brands.

According to the report the current market of the top 10 luxury brands have a combined brand value of nearly 65.5 billion Dollars - I wonder does this really imply that they are manufacturing luxury goods or simply, as I have said before, mass producing tat to be consumed by the masses.

Millward Brown suggest that 'in general, Moët & Chandon, Louis Vuitton, Hermès, and the other luxury brands ranked high in brand contribution emphasized heritage and craftsmanship and limited distribution in the “mass luxury” market'. I do understand how a luxury brand can emphasize heritage because heritage adds value but how they can emphasize craftsmanship and limited distribution when their products are mass produced is confusing. But how can a brand limit distribution when their combined brand value exceeds 65.5 billion Dollars and they retail their goods around the world? Surely this is a contradiction in terms. They also go on about ethics and how consumers are no longer consuming conspicuously but are concerned with the origins of the product and how craftsmanship is once again becoming important. Are luxury brands really concerned with ethics, sustainability and the origins of their materials? I may not be looking hard enough but I have yet to find a luxury brand that has a Walmart type sustainability index. If Walmart can do it...

The report also says that ‘in a world of mass-produced consumer goods, bespoke attention to individuality became the ultimate luxury’ – HELLO – why else would consumers start to move away from luxury brands? They are starting to realise that the goods are not luxury at all. The marketers are now starting to realise that they cannot dupe all of the people all of the time and it is now time to change their tactics. So the answer to them is to try to recreate the ‘salon’ or ‘workshop’ atmosphere through advertising and in store – enhance the shopping experience through a false sense of security – pretend that they are addressing the needs, wants and desires of the shopper. Millward Brown discuss the Gucci model where ‘areas of some of its stores are turned into small workshops...’ Is this really luxury?

Millward Brown also note that luxury brand value is down 13% overall, they say that 'while the brand value of the luxury sector still lagged its pre-recession level, customers came back as evidenced by Burberry’s 86 percent leap and the brand appreciation of Cartier, Estée Lauder and Hermès.' Since when was Estée Lauder a luxury brand? This further emphasizes the confusion in the market. How are brands defined as luxury? And who decides?

The glory days of Louis Vuitton, Gucci, Chanel, Dior (not Christian Dior – that says it all) and even Hermes producing true luxury products are gone. That is not to say that don’t produce nicely made stuff – it’s just not luxury stuff. In my mind, cynical as I am, luxury brands are about money, making it for themselves and their shareholders.

Luxury, I am sure, will be re-claimed by the gifted craftsmen who embrace innovation, know how to ‘make’ and have an incessant desire to learn, teach and produce the most wonderful things.