Imagine trends decoded before they surface, film and photography backgrounds morph at will, models multiply, and designs materialize from algorithms rather than ateliers—a seamless utopia, if one overlooks the faint echo of human imperfection left behind. In fashion and beauty, artificial intelligence is no longer confined to supply chains, it’s generating campaigns, personalizing products, and even scripting stories.
Data highlights the stakes. The generative AI market is set to hit nearly $67 billion in 2025, with a 37% annual growth rate pushing it beyond $442 billion by 2031.
Digital Models, Real Backlash
H&M unveiled digital clones of 30 models, dubbed “digital twins,” for marketing purposes. The brand secured permissions, allowing models to control their AI likenesses. Jörgen Andersson, H&M’s creative director, noted, “People will be divided.” Critics pounced, claiming it erodes genuineness and threatens modeling gigs. A social media user labeled it “erasing human artistry.” The move hints at industry changes, with AI tackling everyday shoots while humans handle premium ones.
It fuels talks on fair pay and rights for digital selves. Sara Ziff, executive director of the advocacy group Model Alliance, told The Business of Fashion, “Would they pay more because they’re saving on the costs of travel, for example, or less because they don’t have to be physically present?” H&M, responding to the uproar, affirmed a commitment to a “human-centric approach” amid ongoing “discussions and uncertainty.”
“A “human-centric approach,” they say—ironic, considering the twins in question could “work” forever without so much as a coffee break.
AI as Scenic Partner
By comparison, self-portrait’s Pre-Fall 2025 campaign wielded AI more subtly, for backgrounds alone. Photographer Drew Vickers conjured scenes fusing 1960s vibes with futuristic abstractions, captured in Seoul with Jisoo front and center. Founder Han Chong said, “working with Vickers and AI let the team ‘blur the line between what’s real and what’s imagined… The AI wasn’t there to replace anything, but to build new worlds for Jisoo to inhabit.’” In this case, AI amplified visuals without sidelining key players.
Expanding Horizons in Beauty and Design
L’Oréal joined forces with Nvidia in June 2025 to weave AI into everything from formulas to ads, using generative tools for custom campaigns and 3D models. Nvidia’s Asim Hussain stated in a release that it would “unlock AI’s potential across multiple aspects of beauty.”
In watches, G-Shock tapped AI for its MT-G line. Designers sketched concepts, then let algorithms fine-tune cases for durability and lightness, keeping humans in command.
Authorship in the Age of AI
Christie’s February 2025 “Augmented Intelligence” auction raked in $728,784, spotlighting works by Refik Anadol (trained on public NASA data) and Holly Herndon with Mat Dryhurst. An open letter from over 6,000 artists charged, “These models, and the companies behind them, exploit human artists, using their work without permission or payment to build commercial AI products that compete with them.” Christie’s countered that its artists often used self-sourced data to augment their art. The outcry underscores copyright woes, with suits against Midjourney and Stable Diffusion persisting.
Ethical Fault Lines
Such episodes expose rifts in creative sectors. In fashion and beauty, AI could sideline models, photographers, and designers by automating roles sans proper recompense. This disruption extends to the broader ecosystem of image makers, including stylists who curate looks, glam teams handling makeup and hair, and set designers crafting immersive environments—all facing potential obsolescence as AI generates entire visuals without the collaborative spark of on-set teams. Copyright clashes arise when models learn from unapproved works, aping styles and undercutting originators. Beyond that, AI might entrench slim beauty norms in an industry already critiqued for inclusivity lapses, potentially amplifying biases baked into training data.
A Goldman Sachs analysis estimates that up to 300 million full‑time jobs worldwide could be exposed to automation, a sobering figure for creative workers from pattern cutters to casting agents and the myriad behind-the-scenes roles that fuel fashion’s visual storytelling.
A Framework for Responsible Use
Fashion teeters between tech daring and human essence. The coming years may tip whether AI frees creators or erodes what makes the field vital. Industry voices push for safeguards, like those in Self-Portrait’s transparent AI disclosures or H&M’s consent protocols. Key ideas include revealing AI involvement in images or designs; securing, and paying for, permissions tied to likenesses or inspirations; and positioning AI as a human aide, as G-Shock did in optimizing sketches rather than supplanting them.
Certain AI uses shine as true collaborators, yet knots like copyright, job shifts, and data biases persist unresolved. Tech advances eclipse rules, risking normalized shortcuts. Without shared guidelines, AI might prioritize cuts over craft, but clear guidelines could prevent that slide. As ethicist Timnit Gebru observed, “What I’ve realized is that we can talk about the ethics and fairness of AI all we want, but if our institutions don’t allow for this kind of work to take place, then it won’t.” Institutions, take note: talking ethics is easy, building them into the code is where the real couture-level tailoring happens.
Core queries linger: Who claims an AI design rooted in fashion’s past? How to foster trust in blurred realities? Brands offering solid responses, via data ethics and creator credits, might harness AI’s upsides while dodging a trust shortfall. The solution, if there is one, will depend on whether brands treat AI as a shortcut or a collaborator. Right now, both futures still feel plausible.
