If we are seeing the diversification of fashion production and distribution, and the death of cut and sew, what might the emerging future of fashion look like?

This week I showed a group of my students the sweatshop documentary China Blue as we do every semester. It’s always an eye opener for most of them as they begin to grapple with the realities of our globalized clothing production system. Most are vaguely aware of ideas of sweat shops and poor working or environmental conditions that go toward making the clothing they buy and wear every day so cheap and accessible, but when confronted with the personal stories of boys and girls of a similar or younger age the awareness seems to stick.

The many problems of the fashion industry can be traced to its incredible degree of globalization and a lack of skills at the hands of consumers. We just don’t see the clothing being made anymore, we don’t know how it is made, so most consumers have very little understanding of the time or resources (both human and natural) it takes to design, produce and transport clothing because it is made in a factory, somewhere else and by someone else. Adding to the problem, is that fact that many western countries simply do not have production capabilities with producers closing their doors when imports become too cheap to compete with. Many consumers lack the confidence to mend a garment or modify it to better suit them, so instead buy another. So how might a technology driven re-localization of fashion production solve some of these problems?

Imagine this. You are about to go out on a Friday evening and realize you “have nothing to wear!” You pay $50 to download from the internet that latest Fall 2018 dress design you love, software modifies it to fit exactly and then sends it to your desktop 3D printer, 30 minutes later you’re out the door.

The rise of digital fabrication within industry and our communities, is signaling massive changes ahead in the way we consume and design clothing. Already online hubs for product design and dissemination such as Shapeways and Ponoko are pushing the Etsy model of community driven, small scale production and retail of products to the next level. These firms are enabling designers, users and consumers to generate and modify products and have them manufactured and easily distributed, all from their computers.

The location of design and production is shifting from large scale, mass-sameness to a micro-production, co-designed, distributed production model. The headaches of transportation and having the right products in the hands of consumers when they want them will be solved. The technology needed to turn this dream into a reality is already available; companies such as Solidoodle and Makerbot Industries are putting digital fabrication into our homes, allowing users to print household 3D objects such as door handles, utensils and toys. Makerbot Industries say “Instead of going shopping, MakerBot it!” The current drawback for these tools is the relatively low resolution of their prints and the small scale of the objects they can produce. However, as technology improves, the high resolution and larger scales available to industry will become available to home 3D printers.

Additionally the availability of high-end machinery to the public through open systems such as the Fab Lab, means that the creation of complex, high resolution outputs can also be at the hands of almost anyone, from the skilled amateur in Canada to the community group in Zambia.

Fab Labs have spread from inner-city Boston to rural India, from South Africa to the North of Norway. Activities in fab labs range from technological empowerment to peer-to-peer project-based technical training to local problem-solving to small-scale high-tech business incubation to grass-roots research. Projects being developed and produced in fab labs include solar and wind-powered turbines, thin-client computers and wireless data networks, analytical instrumentation for agriculture and healthcare, custom housing, and rapid-prototyping of rapid-prototyping machines.

Apply this scenario to the production and design of clothing and the existing fashion system becomes much more distributed. It would not mean necessarily that the existing model of fashion production and consumption would disappear, more that it would become augmented and accessible to users in ways that we might struggle to foresee. In much the same way that desktop printers and photocopiers changed the way users generated and consumed printed material, making it easier for example, for niche groups to distribute pamphlets and zines to support their own agendas, increased availability of new technologies will further remove control of the fashion system from traditional sites of fashion creation and into the hands of the skilled amateur. Users who cannot pattern-make or sew will be able to easily generate/personalize/manipulate/hack fashion objects or messages through the use of technology made tangible, allowing almost anyone to participate in the local production of fashion.

So what’s happening now? The fantastical Iris Van Herpen and the more accessible Continuum are providing us with contemporary suggestions of what our future might look like. Iris Van Herpen has been pushing the boundaries of 3D printing for fashion creation since her Crystallization and subsequent Escapism collections. She works in collaboration with well-known architects and the leading digital printing company MGX by Materialise, the results of which are some of the most stunning and confronting clothing designs since Alexander McQueen.

While currently these designs are relatively rigid and primarily for the catwalk, as technology improves the availability of new flexible printing materials will change that. An existing application which deals with the rigidity of 3D printing materials in a clever way is supplied by Continuum, who provide their N12 Bikini available on 3D printing site Shapeways, while their online software app allows users to design their own D.dress with a simple click of the mouse. The hybrid of chemistry and fashion in the form of Fabrican allows users to design, create, repair and modify clothing from home with ease, at any time. Rip your pants sitting eating your lunch on a park bench? Pull out your can of Fabrican from your handbag and patch it right then and there. An unexpected cold snap? Spray on some longer sleeves. You arrive at a party to see that someone else is wearing the exact same dress? Duck into the bathroom and modify it.

We can begin to imagine a future where open source software allows everyday users to generate 3D knitted garment design they can send to their local FABLab, while 3D printing their own buttons and closures at home. Fashion designers will sell digital files online for printing through an online digital fabrication hub such as Ponoko, while the more tech savvy users will manipulate these designs to suit their size, climate or taste before the garment is produced down the street from where they live. We can see a future where our everyday tools of clothing maintenance and fashion creation come from a can in our handbag. And imagine this: clothing fibers printed at the molecular level, allowing the raw material to be recycled into new garments when the old design is past its “fashion moment” the ultimate in closed loop design.

The post The Fashion Consumer Gets Technologically Empowered appeared first on EcoSalon.

Are we witnessing the beginning of the end of the cut and sew garment production industry?

The majority of today’s fashion is produced using techniques that remain largely unchanged for the past 150 years. It is labor intensive; with many hands touching and working to produce the garments we wear everyday. The industry that manufactures our clothing is one of the least automated industries, and has by and large failed to ever fully embrace mass production techniques.

Mass manufacturing processes such as rotational molding revolutionized the production of furniture and other objects for industrial design, while robotics have transformed vehicle production. Automated processes and technologies are routinely used in almost all other industries, but human hands largely still make the bulk of what we wear.

The processes that come together to produce a fashion garment are broken into tiny actions, each operated by a different highly efficient and well-practiced individual. For example there will be one person who rivets your jeans, another who top stitches the pockets and yet another who only trims threads. One of the few aspects of garment production that has been automated is cutting. CNC blades or laser cutters rapidly cut multiple layers of cloth at the same time. However, this only occurs in large-scale production, as most small and medium scale manufacturers still cut by hand. By the time your garment reaches you it has passed through many hands, each person paid a fraction of the cost to produce the whole.

There are many contradictions apparent in this high labor industry.

The Good: it keeps a lot of people employed, in fact more people are employed by the textile and apparel industry than any other.

The Bad: they are generally paid a low wage and often work in poor working conditions in a repetitive (trimming threads for the rest of your life anyone?) and sometimes dangerous job. Transitioning into a more automated industry had profound impacts on the motor vehicle manufacturing industry, reducing the cost of cars and increasing production, while leaving thousands unemployed and the communities who relied on the industry decimated. If garment production were to follow the automated route the impacts are difficult to gauge, though unemployment would likely be one of them. The question of whether the payoffs are worth it is part of an ongoing debate, but what would an automated fashion production industry even look like? What might it mean for consumers and designers?

Many of the advances in industrial design technology focus around the transition from subtractive production processes, where you start with a sheet or block of material and remove what you don’t need to make the finished object, to additive processes, where you start with nothing and you only add what you need. Additive technologies are faster and less labor intensive when automated and produce substantially less waste to produce the same or better end result. It enables form and structures never before possible with reductive processes.

Julian Roberts, Subtraction Cutting

Some of the most interesting developments in regards to garment design and production are occurring at the threshold between industrial design, science and fashion. Revolutionary thinkers at these intersections have produced spray on fabric, 3D printed swimwear and couture, Liquid Molded garments, and DPOL. These emerging (and still developing) technologies add to more mainstream techniques such as whole garment knitting, digital printing, embroidery and laser cutting, to present us with a future for the fashion industry which is vastly different to the one we have now.

Conflating the textile production and garment production processes through technological advances such as 3D printing, as well as producing garment forms otherwise impossible, also significantly reduces waste and carbon emissions. The highly globalized nature of the fashion industry leads to the raw materials of textiles grown in one country, processed in another and cut and sewn in yet another, all while being sold all over the world.

Imagining in contrast, a future where we have a 3D printer on our desktop at home is not that far off, so picture this: You are about to go out on a Friday evening and realize you “have nothing to wear!” You pay $50 to download from the internet that latest Fall 2018 dress design you love, software modifies it to fit exactly and then sends it to your desktop 3D printer, 30 minutes later you’re out the door.

This will happen.

Image: Kheel Center, Cornell, The Denim Wiki

The post The Death of Cut and Sew and the Birth of 3D appeared first on EcoSalon.

A look at the people who are truly making your clothes unique.

Fashion designers within the conventional fashion industry have become disengaged from fashion construction and makers are marginalized. Designers are the public face of the fashion industry, basking in its glamor and prestige, with makers often sitting at the opposite end of the hierarchy. The distance is philosophical, with the role of the fashion designer seen to involve applying creative vision to generate a sketch for the maker (or more, usually a team of makers) to manifest.

Julian Roberts, inventor of the “Subtraction Cutting” method in an Openwear interview talks of designing in patterns, “rather than in vague illustrative drawings which become reinterpreted by other skilled cutters.”

The distance between designer and maker of fashion at the design stage can also be physical, with the actual manufacturing process hidden from view in far-away sweat shops and not talked about or celebrated. Julian Roberts says “before you buy a garment and wear it, it will have been touched by many skillful hands, but often the hand that touches it the LEAST is the hand of the fashion designer.”

The physical and philosophical distance has enabled a range of issues to arise and be solidified over the last 150 years, or ever since Charles Worth the “Father” of fashion design, placed his label on a garment. These include concerns of exploitation, copying, speed vs. innovation and secrecy. How can a re-engagement of design and making foster meaningful, sustainable change in the fashion industry?

Shingo Sato

I consider myself to be a patternmaker-designer. To design zero waste garments you need to be able to design as you make the pattern and not just in response to a design. Design occurs in many places but it does not occur as a sketch of the exterior of the garment, but in the development of the pattern. What implications does designing in this manner have on the development of a sustainable fashion industry? For a start it can result in the unexpected. Much of the fashion we see is a copy of what’s been done before, either last week, last season or last century. For many, the design process involves directly or indirectly copying an existing design, so the patternmaker’s job has become to faithfully recreate the look within the companies size range and for the desired fabrication, perhaps with a few modifications.

The end result can be disheartening for consumers when they see a rapid dissemination of similar styles globally, a process that leads to its ever-faster fashion “death.” It is also a difficult thing for designers, as they know styles are repeated ad nauseam throughout history, then their consumers can (and do) buy vintage garments while remaining fashionable.

For most companies it does not make economic sense to invest time (and therefore money) into the development of a design if the likely outcome is not known. The speed of change driven by the monetary benefits of Economies of Scale and consumer are demanding, so while the argument for which comes first generally descends into a chicken and egg debate, the problem is a very real and immediate one for fashion companies. A problem they solve by repeating and copying existing styles. It should be no surprise that this is the foundation of the contemporary fashion system.

Comme des Garcons, AW 2012

Famous Scottish architect and designer Charles Rennie MacIntosh, once said “There is hope in honest error. None in the icy perfections of the mere stylist.” Have fashion designers become mere stylists? With economic and time pressures at an all time high for fashion creatives, the space once available for truly innovative fashion is being squeezed out and much of what does happen occurs at the fringes of the industry. This is often in education, where both graduates and academics in many cases have more creative time and space without the financial restrictions demanded by the need to produce a commercial body of work up to six times per year (or more in the case of fast fashion).

Luckily every season there are examples of designers who push things in a different direction. Whether by material use, technique or form there are designers and their creative teams which pride themselves on demonstrating true innovation in at least parts of their collections. When Rei Kawakubo of Comme Des Garcons sent her models down the catwalk for AW 2012 devoid of a soundtrack with 2-Dimensional garments full of wry cliché it was a clear critique of the growing “flatness” of the industry.

Junya Watanabe

Rei Kawakubo is renowned for being an innovator in the true sense of the word in the fashion world, constantly pushing viewers and wearers with her own unique view of the dressed body – famously bulging and distorted, always 3D – so for her to present such a flat body of work speaks volumes of the state of the industry. As the representation of the fashion industry becomes more and more about ubiquitous and repetitive copies, fashion rebels like Rei Kawakubo and Junya Watanabe seek to find alternatives. For many, this alternative is evident in the rise of craftsmanship, in particular, a re-emergence of innovative patternmaking.

Pattern Magic, Tomoko Nakamichi

Patternmaking is seen by many to be an aloof, mathematical and often dry practice, certainly not design, and very inaccessible. However, when Patternmaking and Design meet as equals, magical things can happen. The brilliant and enigmatic book series from Laurence King Publishing called Pattern Magic, gives a taste for what kind of alchemy is possible. Written by Tomoko Nakamichi of the famous Bunka Fashion College in Japan – a college who taught fashion innovator Yohji Yamamoto –  this series of books introduces the reader to thinking about the design of garments in unashamedly 3D and unexpected ways. Originally printed only in Japanese the images show garment features merging from collar to body, form leaping off the body, while soft geometry and the body tussle with each other and mercifully, standardized forms became passé. The skilled patternmaker can become a kind of magician-designer, deceiving the wearer and viewer, distorting the dressed body, and giving us something refreshing.

From Pattern Magic

Patternmaker, designer and educator Shingo Sato gives away many of his techniques and make his “tools of the trade” readily available on youtube. While his approach, which he calls “Transformation, Reconstruction” has been critiqued as simply dart manipulation and elimination, something which is neither new or innovative, he demystifies the process, merging design with patternmaking to “draw” line and form on the dress form, often with a magic marker. An exploration of his techniques reveals an ease with breaking tradition and the adoption of new form, the old rules need not apply.

Julian Roberts, Subtraction Cutting

Julian Roberts is a UK based designer and inventor of what is called Subtraction Cutting. This process involves designing not the exterior, not the front, back or side, indeed there are usually no side seams to his garments (after all, do humans have side seams?). Instead, Roberts designs the interior space of the garment that the body travels through. His approach results in forms that are difficult to predict, requiring an intimate relationship between designer, hand, cloth and body. While acting as “Fashion Adviser for Europe, South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa” for the British Council, he also spends much of his time teaching workshops full of students how to take the creation of clothing in new directions by engaging their maker-mind in the design process.

Julian Roberts, Live Subtraction Cutting, Liverpool

Both Shingo and Julian freely share their processes, rebelling not only against aesthetic norms but also against the tradition of secrecy in the fashion industry. The growing call for openness and transparency strikes fear into the hearts of many designers and the wider implications still need working out. However, sharing design processes which cannot lead to mindless copying (from designer to designer to highstreet to trash), helps to slow the fashion juggernaught down, provides consumers with real choice and not just the illusion of choice, while reconnecting designers and consumers with makers and producers, will lead to an industry which does all things better.

And for that we should all rejoice.

Image: Style.com, Laurence King Publishers

The post The Marriage of Patternmaking and Fashion Design appeared first on EcoSalon.

“The more ephemeral fashion is, the more perfect it is. You can’t protect what is already dead.” – Morand

In a recent blog post, Consumerist fashion: Innovation Repressor, author and fashion pioneer Kate Fletcher wrote that “consumerist fashion not only damages the resource base, workers, consumers, etc., but also – and perhaps more insidiously – represses innovation; stifling anything other than that which benefits those invested in the status quo.”

One of the most obvious manifestations of this is in the immense speed of the fashion cycle, a system so rapidly changing that opportunities for “real innovation” are extremely limiting. The speed of change in fashionable dress is an old grievance of cultural observers. “Ah! Quelle Antiquité!” exclaim the couple in Carle Vernet’s etching dressed in the height of 1793 French fashion – “Oh! Quelle Folie que la Nouveauté!!!” replies the couple dressed in fashionable 1778 dress. The exchange roughly translates to  “Ah! What Antiquity!” and “Oh! What Madness of Innovation!” illustrating the rapid changes occurring in fashion in post-revolutionary France – and as a result the remainder of the fashionable world.

Carle Vernet

This “Madness of Innovation” is what still compels the fashion industry onward today. Author Barbara Vinken describes fashion as “the empire of the ephemeral,” in her book Fashion Zeitgeist and French writer and early Modernist Paul Morand claimed, “The more ephemeral fashion is, the more perfect it is. You can’t protect what is already dead”. Such musings are all well and good, but when the ephemeral nature of fashion leads to seemingly mountainous deposits of undesirable fashion items relegated to landfill – perhaps another attitude needs to be encouraged.

Fletcher describes consumerist fashion as a system that continually needs to “self-justify” itself, creating new styles in ever-faster cycles to replace old ones, which inevitably wear out quickly and were never intended to be mended. The phenomenal speed of this cycle relies on the ability of fashion houses large and small, from the high street to fashion week to copy and be influenced by the existing design work of other designers, either contemporary or historical. I say it “relies on it” because for fashion houses at all levels the development time for collections is growing ever shorter, leaving minimal time for true innovation and the pressure to meet deadlines and profit margins necessitates a degree of copying.

A homage or just plain knocking off? From left to right: East West Musical Instruments Co., Balenciaga, and Urban Outfitters

A good friend who was working for a fast fashion producer in London replied to an email I had sent her about my own work addressing sustainable fashion design, production and consumption systems. Describing the design process in the company she worked for she wrote “I don’t actually design them. But, in the loosest sense of design, I ‘adjust.’ Are you laughing??? I do most days. I correct appalling fit, I decided on length/print/colourways. I rip out a Lacroix skirt (out of Vogue) that I love with loads of lace and send it out to the factory with a line drawing and basic spec, cross my fingers and hope that something nice comes back.”

Current international law regarding the protection of fashion designs in theory allows designers to protect their designs, usually through the application of design patents or “trade dress,” and in the case of copyright automatically protects the patterns, textile design and sketches relating to any design and long as it is original. But what is original? The fashion zeitgeist can be described as a continuous line, a progression of ideas for which most are traceable through a cyclical lineage which marries other contemporary designers work with historical dress and often street fashion. As a result the difficulty in proving originality of idea in its entirety is immense.

An added complexity is the evolution of the fashion industry from being a relatively simple “trickle-down” procession of ideas to the non-linear system we have today where fashion ideas appear to come from anywhere. When writing about and discussing Zero Waste Fashion Design with others, I often need to point out that what I do also isn’t new. Zero-waste pattern cutting has been around for thousands of years in the form of Kimono and other historical costume, and more recently many designers worldwide such as Issey Miyake, Timo Rissanen, Mark Liu, Yeohlee Teng and Zandra Rhodes have been engaging with it.

Writer and designer Holly McQuillan at the traveling Yield Zero Waste Exhibit she curates

Miucci Prada famously said, “We let others copy us. And when they do, we drop it”. This altruistic attitude only works when the copied designer is already desirable to fashion consumers and the designer has generated income from being the first to produce the design. However since the advent of the Internet and improvements in manufacturing, the translation from high fashion to high street now only takes weeks, explaining why copying is so much more of a problem now.

Previously high fashion and couture houses were relatively unconcerned by copies as they would only be on the market after the original designs had had their moment and they had made a return on their investment. Indeed the copies indirectly drive later sales due to the obsolescence they induce. The Internet, whilst making fashion more accessible to consumers worldwide, has also made it very easy for fast fashion houses to translate consumer interest into new variations.

Anna Sui spring 2007 RTW on left and Forever 21′s Maven Top on right

Once styles are gleaned from the internet and processed by the design room, manufacturing advances mean that fast fashion firms such as Zara can take as little as 14 days from design room to retail floor – consequently taking income away from the designers that invested in developing the idea in the first place. Contemporary fashion moments pass by so quickly as to negate much of the need to protect individual designs – by the time designers patent their work, the fashion value of that piece is likely to have diminished if not dissolved completely. The result is that the majority of the fashion world treats their outputs as Creative Commons – “shared resources that can be freely reused, recreated and recombined” with a mostly self-governing “shame-police.”

Instead of legislating the rights of designers, fashion savvy consumers and observers can spot, and through blogs, out an overt copy, or as it is more euphemistically labeled “homage.” The loss of reputation can be damaging so most high-end designers try to avoid intentionally referencing other designers work too heavily. The situation becomes much more complex when well known designers copy little known players in the industry. It has been argued that this “referencing” aids the original designer, by giving them publicity which they may have otherwise never received, a convenient viewpoint for those with power in the fashion industry.

Feral Childe Teepee Print

Forever 21 Knockoff Print

Despite the potential benefit to society there appears to be little motivation from either designers or consumers to slow down the rate of change and so-called “innovation” in the fashion industry. The financial benefit from the current system is great. The specter of the derivative-driven fashion cycle is however something that should concern sustainable fashion designers. Indeed if the fashion industry as a whole aims to eventually be sustaining and follow best practice then the rampant excesses of consumption need to be addressed, something that companies such as Marks & Spencer who, whilst making great leaps forward in providing organic product ranges and other sustainable initiatives, fail to address. There are few design companies who actively encourage their consumers to buy less.

There are other ways to measure success. The fashion industry could protect and nurture up and coming designers, it could develop better pay and working conditions for the millions of its workers, it could move toward being an industry which values truly innovative design and prevents the proliferation of so-called “new or innovative” products purely for the sake of a quick return.

The more often that products are released to the public, the more often the consumers feel the need for change, and the faster that consumers get bored with current offerings. This could be attributed to the idea (as French provocateur Jean Baudrillard stated) that we consume as we lack any other real purpose in our lives. So we need alternatives.

Kate Fletcher writes: “To this, the response of those of us who love nature and the creative and cultural power of fashion and design can only be to invigorate innovation of these alternatives and develop a different plan of action.”

Image: Fashion Bomb Daily

The post The Hypocrisy of Fashion ‘Innovation’ appeared first on EcoSalon.

Zero waste fashion designers step up the aesthetics to be more pleasing for the masses.

Zero Waste Pattern Design seems at first glance to deal unashamedly with only the front end of the fashion cycle, with the theory going that if the designer agonizes over eliminating waste then consumers only need worry about what to do with the garments when they don’t want them any more. But it is much more than just a matter of asking “Have I used ALL of that piece of cloth?” as doing only this would potentially result in garments that no one would want to purchase.

With zero waste pattern design, and indeed all sustainable fashion, aesthetics cannot be at the expense of the environment, just as much as the environment cannot be at the expense of aesthetics. There must exist a harmony between both, and thankfully many sustainable designers have found it.

It is a strange thing however, that many of the worlds zero waste designers come from two such apparently different parts of the world, New York or Australasia. Australiasian designers who explore these ideas include Material By Product, Mark Liu, Timo Rissanen and Julia Lumsden. There are a number of New York based designers who use zero waste fashion design philosophies in their work, notably the iconic Yeohlee Teng.

I spoke to last year and this year’s Ecco Domani Fashion Foundation winners Tara St James and Titania Inglis this past week, fresh out of their New York Fashion Week shows. Here’s what they had to say.

Mark Liu

What is your sustainable fashion philosophy and how were you motivated to take your work in this direction?

Titania Inglis: My philosophy came from my mother, who taught me from a young age that it was better to buy a few beautiful pieces of clothing than lots and lots of not-so-great clothes. With the end goal of a small wardrobe in mind, I try to make clothes that are versatile and can often be worn in multiple ways; that feature high-quality, long-lasting fabrics and finishing; and that are both of the moment and yet well-proportioned and classic enough to wear for years to come.

Tara St James: To date I haven’t focused on one single sustainability philosophy, instead I try to examine several aspects of ethical design to evaluate which are a good fit for my brand and which are not.  For example my very first collection, entitled The Square Project, was a study in zero waste pattermaking, while of course using all overstock or sustainable textiles, and to this day I still implement a lot of zero waste in my designs.  I also work very closely with artisan weavers and knitters through Source4Style and other outlets. And I produce about 90% of my garments in New York City.

Ironically I was steered towards sustainability in 2004 when I started my previous brand Covet and was sourcing new textiles in China where I found a bamboo jersey I loved. I say ironically because I no longer work with either bamboo or China, but it opened my eyes to the concept of ethical sourcing, and that’s when I started researching different textiles and production methods. There has been tremendous change since then, I’ll say that.

Titania Inglis, Spring 12

How do you incorporate this waste reduction/elimination philosophy into your design and/or production processes?

Titania Inglis: Again, I believe strongly that classic, beautifully made clothes are the best antidote to waste. That said, with an eye to cradle-to-grave sustainability, I recycle all of my fabric scraps and try whenever possible to cut smaller pieces from existing scraps; try to choose 100% cotton and 100% wool fabrics that are easily recycled; and recommend on the care labels that garments be aired out often and washed less, both to save on water and to ensure that they last longer.

As far as zero-waste pattern making goes, my Spring/Summer 2011 collection was based around that technique, and I approached it both through bias cutting and origami folding, creating two origami-pleated bustle skirts and a bias top and dress that were cut from simple shapes that could be interlocked on the marker to eliminate fabric waste. Because there was a tiny bit of fabric that wasn’t used in the pieces, I called it my “Almost Zero” collection. Some of the pieces have since reappeared in successive collections, with the bias T-shirt becoming one of my signature pieces.

Tara St James: I’ve found it much easier to reduce waste on an individual level and less so when larger production quantities come into the picture. If I’m designing, cutting and sewing something myself, I can easily control how the garment is made, but to scale both the design and pattern to include different sizes and fabrications has been a challenge, although not an insurmountable one.

Tara St James, Spring 12

How do your customers respond to your ethical goals and resulting products – how strongly do you market your products as ethical?

Titania Inglis: While I do offer information about my philosophy and production methods on my website, I choose to market the line first and foremost as a fashion line, leaving the ethical standards as an added benefit. Clothing is a unique product in that it’s meant to be worn, so the look of it, the fabric choice, and the fit come first when a woman is shopping. If she loves a piece and will wear it forever, that’s far more environmentally sound than if she buys it for its ethical production methods and then leaves it in the back of her closet because she hates the look.

Tara St James: I don’t actively market my brand as ethical, I want my customers to buy the clothing first because they love it, and they usually only find out the sustainability of the brand after they’ve spoken to the shop owner or done some research on the brand.  However there is a rising population of shoppers who seek out ethical fashion and want to support local designers. With them I’m happy to be as open sourced and transparent as possible. After all, the story behind the clothing is my means of creating a dialogue with my customer. I don’t want that dialogue to end when they’ve made their purchase.

How do you see yourself improving on your current practices – what’s in the future for your company?

Titania Inglis: The biggest challenge is always fabric sourcing. I’m constantly on the lookout for beautiful new organic or sustainably produced fabrics; I’ve traveled to London and Tokyo for sourcing, and found amazing materials there. This season I sourced a gorgeous vegetable-tanned leather from France, and I’m dying to make handbags or shoes from it as soon as I find the right collaborator.

Tara St James: I would like to start researching more technical and recycled synthetic textiles. I love using natural fibres such as hand woven cottons, wools and silks, but when I examine the water consumption for some of these fibres, it’s difficult to ignore the reality and is pushing me towards longer lasting, more versatile textiles such as recycled polyester, which can also be printed by companies like AirDye, who I worked with on my Spring 12 collection.

The post Zero Waste Fashion Touts an Overabundance of Style appeared first on EcoSalon.

From a wasteful fashion industry emerges the Zero Waste movement.

It is said that the next great war will not be over oil, but water. So when it takes 1,800 gallons of water to grow enough cotton to produce a single pair of jeans, it is extraordinary that cloth has become a readily disposable commodity of little value. Indicative of this is the fact that on average 15 – 20% of cloth needed to produce a garment is wasted and the useless remnants are destined for the incinerator, landfill or occasionally as mattress filler.

In 2008 China, one of the world’s largest exporters of textiles and clothing produced 31.8 billion meters of fabric in January to July alone. You could reasonably estimate that almost 5 billion meters of that fabric was wasted. This astonishing wastefulness is caused by the entrenched traditions of the fashion industry, which separate the stages of garment design and production into hierarchies where the designers often work isolated from production. It is a system that fails to acknowledge that textiles are a finished product with energy invested into their design and manufacture and which seems primarily interested in the next new thing, forgetting also about what happens to garments at the end of their fashionable lives. So what’s being done about it?

Zero Waste cutting

Over the last couple of years I have had the privilege of working with Parsons Assistant Professor Timo Rissanen to bring together the work of 12 designers from all over the world in a zero waste fashion exhibition called Yield: Making Fashion Without Making Waste. All of these designers engage in some way with what has come to be known as Zero Waste Fashion Design (ZWFD). ZWFD involves designing clothing that in some way eliminates waste from the production or consumption of clothing.

This can be achieved in a number of ways and through various approaches; some designers use the left over fabric pieces to make other garments or products; others eliminate the creation of waste altogether when designing their patterns. Many designers use second hand clothing in order to remove waste from the post consumer end of the fashion consumption cycle, while others use innovative technology to make garments in completely new ways. All are in some way are addressing the huge volumes of textile waste contributed by the fashion and textile industry and consumers every year – a massive 30kg per person per year in UK and U.S.

Piles of second hand clothes for sale

Designing Out the Waste
Anybody who has cut out and sewn up a garment will be aware of the pieces between the pattern that are not incorporated into the finished garment. Many people save such offcuts for future projects, but there will typically be pieces that are either too small or oddly shaped to be of any use. These are routinely discarded, passing through the trash, en route to the landfill. In industry, markers are designed to eliminate as much of this wastage as possible in order to save money. However, the design of the garments is dictated by aesthetics and market alone, inevitably resulting in surplus pieces that cannot be used. The company can either creatively use this left over 15% to make different products, or by designing both the positive and negative spaces of the pattern it is possible to reduce this figure to zero. ZWFD aims to tick all the boxes of aesthetics, fit, market and zero waste.

The kimono as a historic example of Zero Waste cutting

These approaches, while sometimes appearing new, are in fact as old as clothing itself. For hundreds of years, aesthetics, and to a lesser extent functionality, have been the two pillars of fashion design, and when coupled with the slightly more contemporary desire for speed and change, has lead to the proliferation of too much fashion, too many collections, too often. Historically fashion was expensive because cloth was expensive and time consuming to produce. This meant it made sense to be careful about how you used the cloth you had and how you cared for the clothing you owned. Mending was common and using cloth frugally was standard practice – there are examples of “zero waste garments” from almost every continent and culture, and we’ve been practicing it for centuries.

Admittedly designing ZWF isn’t the easiest when first starting out. This type of design is not about numbers, it’s about experimentation, playfulness and taking a risk, all while being mindful of the impact of your actions. It slows the design of fashion down and forces many parts of the fashion chain to think about waste and material use from a design and production perspective. Many of the problems that exist in the fashion industry begin with ideas of separation, both geographical and hierarchical. Whether designer/producer, producer/consumer, consumption and disposal, the greater the distance and separation between the stakeholders in the fashion chain, the greater the likelihood of discordance and a lack of appreciation of what is really going on.

Holly McQuillan’s own Zero Waste Designs

Designing ZWF needs to be done with either a close relationship between designer and pattern cutter, or by a designer who is the pattern cutter, any other arrangement will be an exercise in futility. The change enables a close relationship between market, aesthetic and fabric yield to flourish, and from this, beautiful things are possible.

A designer attempting a zero waste garment design cannot simply ask, “have I used ALL of that piece of cloth?”

Doing only this would potentially result in garments that no one would want to purchase. So with ZWFD and indeed all sustainable design, aesthetics cannot be at the expense of the environment, just as the environment cannot be at the expense of aesthetics. There must exist a harmony between both.

Writer Holly McQuillan, is the Yield exhibit’s curator, and is also a designer and lecturer in the fashion design program at Massey University’s College of Creative Arts in Wellington, New Zealand.

Top image: McQuillan’s Yield Exhibit in Chicago

The post Zero Waste Fashion and the Next Great War appeared first on EcoSalon.