This presentation is about switching and stitching. Not only because it addresses the intersection of digital electronic technologies and clothing production methods but because I believe there needs to be a switch in the way we design for wearable technologies and we need to stitch together new design communities.
1
In the main, digital fashion products have - up until now been created by applying existing digital & electronic technologies to traditional garment forms. However this does not seem to have created a mainstream fashion or desire for these products. Something is missing… User driven, creative design As Rory Cellan Jones the BBC technology correspondent wrote last week in response to Nokia’s recent patent win against Apple “… Nokia's CEO should be more focussed on driving home the lesson of the iPhone. It's not enough to invent cutting-edge technology, it's not enough to be able to predict what consumers will want a couple of years ahead. You need the design and marketing skills to combine hardware and software into a product that will make people go "wow", rather than "whatever".
2
So what will create consumer “wow� for techno fashions? Possibly it will happen when digital fashion products collide with digital fashion media AND digital fabrication tools
3
Because then we may see the emergence of truly individualised digital fashion products…. created by individual “personal design nodes” via connection to a network of co-creation knowledge and co-creation tools.
4
For the benefit of anyone not familiar with the area of wearable technologies - a brief history Wearables have developed from computers carried on the body,through modular connections, conductive circuits embroidered onto a fabric, sensors woven or knitted directly into a textile using conductive thread and most recently attempts to encapsulate micro devices into the yarn itself. Here we see the original cyborg Steve Mann, wearing hard computing components, the modular MP3 player control panel on a Zegna sports jacket,the embroidered key board by Rehmi Post & Maggie Orth and a knitted sensor by Textronics
5
You may be more familiar however with the most visible -in every sense-application of technology to clothing … light emission dating back to Diana Dew’s light up dress from 1967, And more recently Gareth Pugh’s Electroluminescent jacket from 2006 , Hussein Chalayan’s thought provoking ideas articulated via technology – here a video dress in collaboration with Moritz Waldemayer from 2007 And responsive Emotional Skin dresses from Phillips Research from 2008.
6
So what about digital fashion products today? At one end of the spectrum, coming out of research labs and government funded projects are what could be called - “just about ready-to-wear” Driven by military & medical funding and wearable in the loosest sense with very niche and specific applications. Here the products are created by technology push. Even the gadget loving blog “Engadget” reports of the latest heart rate monitoring belt: “This little black belt promises to "spur the development of a whole new range of. health and fitness apps, by harnessing the power of Bluetooth Low Energy to pump heart rate stats to your mobile phone. Of course that will have to wait until a Bluetooth 4.0-compatible phone hits the market. In the meantime, we wouldn't expect the black chest strap to pioneer any new fashion trends. “
7
At the other end of the spectrum we have “techno couture” driven by the dramatic light effects desired by stage performers. Here illustrated by Cute Circuit’s dress for singer Katy Perry at the Met Ball.
8
But this dress has made the transition to a commercial product. A ready-to-wear version the of the “K-dress” is selling in London’s Selfridges store. British Fashion magazine Grazia reported with enthusiasm about the arrival of the K-dress heralding the “full-on flash-tastic brilliance” it would to bring to “mere mortals” as opposed to the description of “hilarious…..wacky concept piece, more costume than fashion” it gave Perry’s original. Perhaps at over 1500 Euros though - this is still out of reach for most of us.
9
There are products in between this spectrum but none that have captured the imagination or spend of the mass market. At the recent Smart Fabric conference in London this April it was clear that Industry players seem to be looking in vain for a single application with huge market potential that will provide incentives to overcome the various technical, manufacturing and social barriers to wider commercialisation. Perhaps we need to step back from strictly predefined product categories and ask more general questions about employing these technologies on our bodies. Why do we want to wear technology on our body – what benefits can it offer over high performing hand-held products? Some of our initial research at Brunel has identified broader desirable benefits that wearable technologies can deliver. By working in broader categories we hope to give room for emergent behaviour from which more meaningful design solutions can arise. By “meaningful� I mean those which can impact our daily lives We have identified these categories as: communication, body performance, safety & protection and mental stimulation.
10
Taking the most relevant category to fashion – communication Fashion has been theorised as - Conspicuous consumption - explicitly & visually communicating social status. We adopt & appropriate clothing products to define ourselves We can use it to conform, to rebel, to be noticed, to disappear in the crowd or indeed create a visible crowd. But from what do we select and how do we edit and display that identity?
11
Digital communications technologies are increasingly enabling us to construct and display an identity, to be expressive and form communities. We do this by expressing our “likes”, our “Status”, what we subscribe to, who we follow, who we are friends, with what groups we belong to. American cyber anthropologist Amber Case refers to this as “maintenance of our second self”
While Sherry Turkle author of “Life on the Screen” – refers to this as “wearing the web” and the internet being an alternative “performance space” with similar pressures to maintain an appearance.
http://www.ted.com/talks/amber_case_we_are_all_cyborgs_now.html
12
But creating a fashion identity has always been dependent upon the sharing of visual knowledge whether it be trickled down from a fashion elite – the rich & powerful in society -or bubble up from youthful street based subcultures. But with the abundance of information freely available via digital fashion media the origins of fashion trends have become blurred. Who do we identify with? When ordinary people become internet celebrities and musicians become designers to commercialise their “look� the gap between the fashion arbiters and street subcultures has closed.
13
Bubble up is more visible and widespread with the event of street style blogs. But as one commentator on theculltivate blog has suggested “ the over saturation of the blogging world seems to have taken away from both its authority and its innovative outlook.” “brands are trying to adapt to a consumer that is more knowledgable and more opinionated than ever before: we no longer admire uncritically. Bloggers need to quickly adapt to this or else they will be rendered irrelevant as the next fashion fad replaces them.”
Updating the “Street Style” Blog Posted: January 24th, 2011 | Author: Heba http://www.thecultivate.com/blog/?author=1&paged=7
14
Because ultimately - and illustrated brilliantly by Versluis and Uyttenbroek ‘s work - Exactitudes whether trickle-down or bubble-up the vast majority of us will base the way we dress in-part or in-whole on what we see others wearing. And trendsetters – well they wouldn’t be trendsetters if nobody copied them. Luckily for fashion designers & producers they are fairly free to copy too.
15
As Joanna Blakely from the University of Southern California entertainingly describes in her talk “Lessons from fashion’s free culture” at a recent TED conference , the lack of creative ownership in fashion actually pushes fashion designers to innovate http://www.ted.com/talks/johanna_blakley_lessons_from_fashion_s_free_culture.html
16
So what of digital tools in fashion design & production?
As well as enabling smaller scale production and experimentation to reach niche markets they have also pushed creative possibilities as shown by the engineered, garment specific, digital prints of Mary Katranzou and Alexander McQueen
17
3d printing and laser sintering are much newer technologies to fashion but suggest new continuous forms unachievable in traditional fabric constructions as shown by the work of Dutch designer Iris van Herpen. Just in the last few weeks we have seen Continuum Fashion launch their ready-to wear 3d printed bikini with a $400 price tag
18
Many of the newer digital tools being adopted by the fashion industry originate in other disciplines in particular the modelling capabilities of architecture. It’s interesting to see this being formalised in a course run by the UK’s Architectural Association in their Paris School course “Building Fashion” taking pace this autumn
19
Now on a consumer level open source fashion information is nothing new. Home dressmaking has long been adapting easily available pattern templates; and far from merely being an economic necessity it has been a source of expressing individual taste and skill - a form of conspicuous creation- delivering personal enjoyment, social connection and a sense of achievement through community classes and competitions.
20
Web 2.0 platforms are now giving makers and non makers outlets for creativity in a variety of forms that see ideas and preferences become available products. Whether allowing a small degree of choice via mass customisation platforms such as Nike & Converse provide, to community-led production of T-shirt designs such as threadless.com; to pure consumer consultation on stock to sell - such as Connected Generation These platforms allow creators to get either a bespoke product for themselves, peer esteem & kudos for their creative investment, and – increasingly - an economic return
21
Similarly in the digital fashion community there is a growing number of DIY /hacker style blogs and sites not just giving exposure to projects but sharing know-how between skilled amateurs on how to appropriate and source materials and construct soft circuits. This crafter meets hacker approach is perhaps best articulated by Leah Beuchley’s group at MIT – High-Low Tech
22
Buechley’s Lily Pad kit of sewable electronic modules including a sewable Arduino microcontroller was released in 2007 It has been one of the most utilised wearable technology kits but other sets of sewable components adapted from standard electronic components & developers kits are becoming more commonly available.
23
So what does this mean for the future of digital fashion products.? One prediction coming from ex. Motorola Technologist Joespeh Dvorak is that : Wearable systems will incorporate personalities. They will be capable of autonomous behaviour. And people will develop long term symbiotic relationships with their wearable systems Perhaps not too unlike like the Egret bird & hippo
24
So how can we begin to create digital fashion with personality? To reflect the wearers personal choice it would seem sensible to start with components that are customisable in both function and appearance Developed from templates & modules as a kind of electronic Haberdashery designed specifically to be integrated into soft flexible substrates and demanding new form factors for electrical components. Yet importantly leaving creation space for the user; allowing them to visibly see their own influence on the end product.
25
This can be further extended by adding a social and experiential element to the creation process - a physical meet-up to materialise the digital experience and akin to the traditional social activities of knitting & quilting circles. Imagine going clothes-making rather than clothes shopping on a Saturday afternoon. A chance in which to meet designers for fabrication and materials advice provided in the way some stores currently provide personal shopping or instore stylists. Or the way Apple stores provide appointments with Apple Geniuses.
26
However the incorporation of digital components will also be dependent upon the development of flexible and adaptive base materials available in a format that can be fabricated locally on the scale need for wearable applications. Perhaps the concepts of spray-on fabrics such as Fabrican and grow-your own material such as Suzanne Lee’s Biocouture could be developed to incorporate the need for encapsulations, power harvesting and power storage which are still challenges for wearable technologies. The recycling of existing materials both cloth and electronic devices also need to be explored.
27
As objects increasingly become internet enabled -In the Internet of Thingsdigital fashion is likely to shift towards a system of devices that offer simpler connectivity.
The phone no longer needs to be a phone but more of a hub that you wear - that communicates with other worn components or with objects in the local environment.
Brand affinity will depend upon the compatibility of these connected devices. Morph a concept, developed by Nokia Research Center (NRC), UK demonstrates how future mobile devices might be stretchable and flexible, allowing the user to transform their mobile device into radically different shapes.
28
With these wearable and connected systems registered co-creators could then then download updates- comparable with today’s software updatesinforming them of the latest uses, construction tips & trends and location of other creators or they could subscribe to personalised support services from the designer. Modules could self tag themselves making them autonomously visible to the designer and potentially other co-creators to track how they are being used – in what garments, how are those garments then worn and how regularly. Thus creating input to further develop the components.
29
So how do we start to design for emergent behaviour relating to digital fashion ? To understand physical perceptions Dr Sharon Baurley at Brunel is very interested in ‘prototyping in the wild’ – using the ‘prototype as a probe’ These techniques enable us to gain insights into how people might appropriate technology, in this case wearable technology from a social communication perspective. This is a project from 2006 involving HP and Vodafone that started to explore people’s sensory associations of touch, and relate those to textile attributes in order to gain inspiration for new designs for the actuation of touch communication.
30
To begin to understand digital perceptions Digital Sensoria is a project involving Brunel & funded by the RCUK Digital Economy programme, developing multi-modal digital tools that enable people to capture and communicate their sensory perceptions of textile materials to brands. This is Digital Sensoria’s Wardrobe blog which is a personal design node . It is part of trying to think about how mobile phones could be used to capture and tag materials and objects that people can upload to their personal design node and creatively interact with them, share them, and organise them.
31
Digital Sensoria has also used co-design workshops and crowd-sourcing to find out what kinds of images represent consumers perceptions; images of things and places that could be associated with the feeling a material invokes.
At Brunel we are beginning to research if these approaches can extended to understanding perceptions and feelings about technology embedded in clothing.
32
But will this modular approach just leave us with cut & paste design? Merely dependent on the modules supplied? Will design democracy erode design leadership and excellence? What skills and knowledge of materials will be needed by designers and consumers? As I’ve tried to illustrate with an analogy to food recipes - there will be different levels of engagement with different consumers and for different needs with a balance of contribution from “designer� and consumer The skill and design leadership will being in designing the recipe and ways of making that available.
33
Designers will need to think about new product archetypes or meta forms and accompanying aesthetics that break boundaries between disciplines These will be necessary to break down consumers mental modes or habits around existing garments and hand held digital media in order to create new expectations and affordances But designers must not loose connection with materiality of product – fundamental in clothing, which is a tactile as well as visual experience
34
Finally … designers will need to – live along side their consumers conducting a twoway conversation. This is a challenge for many existing fashion brands that try very hard to control their exclusive brand image Particularly when you think that high-end fashion brands are actually the name of the designer – an individual – the creator But the lesson technologists can take from fashion is that emotional pull and desirability can overcome technical & practical limitations and accelerate the acceptance of new technologies.
35
36