The August 2025 issue of Vogue magazine featured a two-page ad spread by Guess…. with? An AI Supermodel. Two well-established brands in the fashion industry. Two well-financed entities. And this is the punchline: For whatever reason, Guess decided to commission an AI artist to create AI supermodel fakes. And to place a teeny-weeny near invisible disclaimer in the fold. Joining the fray, Vogue accepted the ads.
<draft 0.1>
Guess ridiculously went on the record stating how much more “cost effective and efficient” it was to synthesize models from AI, rather than pay all the models, photographers, creative directors, lighting technicians, etc. to perform a real world model shoot. Because, you know, for multinational brands with more than $50 million in annual profit, well… I mean, who can actually afford models any more? Especially fashion companies. Srsly.
Personally I think Guess made a bit of a tactical error. If I was orchestrating the first major brand usage of an AI supermodel, I would embrace it with a bold headline. Instead, by placing the disclaimer in micro-type in the margin, they made it look like they were trying to sneak it by… to “pull a fast one” on the audience, to make them think it was human. Ooops.
@Heidi__939 perhaps sums up
the public reaction best:
aaaaand….
Is it just me, or does our simulacra vixen exhibit more than a casual likeness to the first mega-AI Instagram influencer, Milla Sofia?
Oh, one more thing. It wasn’t just print advertising.
Guess also used the AI Supermodel imagery
in the window displays at its actual flagship retail stores:
Oh how far we have come in just a few short years…
For the record, the cover of the magazine with the offending article:
the AI Supermodel is here to stay
There is, of course, more than a little irony here.
Most of the gripes are along the lines of “AI is giving unrealistic expectations to the idea of feminine beauty.” But wait just a second. Hasn’t that been a critique of the fashion industry from the get? Or at least, in the post-PhotoShop age? Human supermodels are supposed to be extreme representations of beauty. And “realism”? Really? A pro model shoot has tens of thousands of dollars spent on hair-stylists, make-up artists, lighting, lenses… it was never meant to be realistic. Its meant to create an aspirational fantasy.
How is AI any different?
It seems to me, upon reflection, that this might just be the continuation (or perhaps conclusion?) of a looooong evolution.