What is estimated in circulation means for AI model beauty standards

The city has a new supermodel. He is striking, stylish … and not real.

In Vogue’s August print version, an estimate advertisement shown an innocent blonde model that shows a floral placeute from a striped maxi dress and a summer collection of the brand.

In a small print in a corner, advertisement shows that it was made using AI.

While Vogue says that the AI model was not an editorial decision, this is the first time an AI-based person depicted in the magazine.

The advertisement has joined with controversy and questions what it means for the real model, who fought for more diversity, and for consumers – especially young people – are already struggling with unrealistic beauty standards.

The company is behind the controversial advertisement of sephinne Vallora estimate.

Its founder, Valentina Gonzalez and Andreya Petresku, tells the BBC that he was contacted on Instagram, co-founder of estimates, Paul Marsiano and asked to make an AI model as part of the brand’s summer campaign.

“We made 10 draft models for her and she selected a brunette woman and a blonde which we carried forward and developed further,” says Gonzalez.

She states that there is often a misunderstanding that AI image generation is simple, saying that it is actually a complex process.

The company has five employees who create AI models, and it can take up to a month from Idea Inspution to Full Product. The pair say that they charge anywhere for a lesser six figures for a customer like estimates.

But Felicity Haved, a plus-shaped model that has been in the industry for more than a decade, says “it seems lazy and cheap” in fashion campaigns.

“Either guess is doing so to create a talkings and get free publicity or they want to cut the cost and do not think of its implications.”

She describes the Vogue’s decision to include the advertisement as “very disappointing and quite scary”, and worries that it can reduce the years of work in the direction of greater diversity in the industry.

The fashion world was making real progress to be more inclusive in the 2010s-in the decade it was observed that Valentina Sampao first became an open trans model to walk for Victoria Secret, Halima Adan was the first hijab wearing model in global campaigns, and brands like the Savage X Fents Plus-Serve Model on the runway.

But in recent years, Heword believes, the industry has slipped backwards because “these people are not yet booked”.

And the use of the AI model “is another kick in the teeth, and one that will affect the plus-shaped model”, he warns.

Gonzalez and Petrasku are adamant. They do not strengthen narrow beauty standards.

“We don’t make unattainable looks – the AI model looks quite realistic for actually anticipation,” says Petrskue. “Ultimately, all advertisements are designed to look right and are usually supermodels, so what we are doing is no different.”

The pair accepts AI images on their company’s Instagram page, lacks diversity and promotes unrealistic beauty standards. They say that they have tried to be more inclusive, but they are users who are not very attached to those posts.

Gonzalez told the BBC, “We have posted AI images of women with different skin tones, but people do not respond to them – we don’t get any traction or likes.”

“At the end of the day, we are a business and use images on Instagram that will create a conversation and bring us customers.”

The company has yet to use plus-shaped women, claiming that “technology is not advanced enough”.

In 2024, a pigeon advertisement campaign was designed to highlight bias in AI. In advertising, an image generator is asked to make the most beautiful woman in the world and it produces almost unnecessary women who are young, thin and white, with fair hair and blue eyes. The images generated look similar to the AI model.

Havard is worried that people’s mental health can be affected by looking at these unattainable images and their body image can be negatively affected.

Anxiety around unrealistic beauty standards and the harmful effects they can have is nothing new. But unlike traditional airbrushing, which began with at least one real person, these AI models are designed to look digitally correct, free from human defects, anomalies, or uniqueness.

While some high-profile figures such as Ashley Graham, Jamila Jamil and Bella Thorne have spoken against image editing and refused to photoshop their photos, AI has fully talked about such a conversation.

Vogue’s decision to include an AI-borne advertisement has created a stir on social media, with a user on X writing: “Wow! Just as the expectations of beauty were not sufficiently unreal, here AI comes to make him impossible. Even models cannot compete.”

Vanessa Longley, CEO of Eating Disorder Charity Beat, said the BBC advertisement is “worrisome”.

“If people become aware of the images of unrealistic bodies, it can affect their thoughts about their own body, and the image of a bad body increases the risk of developing food disorders,” she says.

Connecting this issue is a lack of transparency – this is not a legal need to label the AI -generated content in the UK.

While the estimate was labeled as its advertisement as AI-Janit, replication is small and subtle. Readers can ignore it and, at a glance, the image appears completely life.

A former model and now Tech Entrepreneur Sinad Bowel wrote an article for Vogue about the risks of modeling instead of AI.

She tells the BBC that it is not “exceptionally problematic” not to label the AI content clearly because it can have harmful effects on people’s mental health.

“Beauty standards are already being affected by AI. A filter has young girls performing plastic surgery to look like a face – and now we look at those who are completely artificial,” she says.

Apart from the impact of the AI model, a consumer can be on, especially if it was unbelled, what about the impact of this technology on those working in the fashion industry?

Sara Zif is the founder of a former model and model Alliance, an organization aimed at carrying forward the rights of workers in the fashion industry.

She says that the AI campaign of estimates is “less about innovation and more about frustration and needs to be cut”.

More broadly, the former model feels that AI in the fashion industry is not naturally exploiting, but often may come at the cost of those who bring it to life because photoshoots contain many more employees than only models and photographers.

“The AI can positively affect the industry, but the workers require meaningful security,” she explains.

Cerafin Valora dismissed the notion that it is excluding people from work, and says its leading technique is “complementary and not to change the model”.

“We are providing companies how they marketing a product,” Petresku explains.

The pair said that they have made a job with their company, and part of the process of making AI models they need to hire a real model and photographer, to see what the product looks on a person in real life.

However, its website lists one of the benefits of working with them as cost-skilled as it “eliminates expensive set-up, MUA artists, location, stage settings, photographers, travel expenses, working models”.

Vogue is on fire to include the advertisement in his print version, with a person on X said that the fashion magazine had “lost credibility”.

Bowel says that the magazine is “seen as the Supreme Court of the fashion industry”, so allowing the AI advertisement means that they are “ruling it as accepted in some way”.

The BBC approached Vogue and estimated for comment. Vogue said that it was an advertisement, not an editorial decision, but refused to respond further.

So, what does the future of the modeling industry look like?

Gonzalez and Petrasku believe that as their technology improves, they will be even more in demand by brands to do things differently.

Bowel feels that there will be more AI-generated models in the future, but “We are not moving towards a future where every model is created by AI”.

She sees positivity in the development of AI in the industry – predicting that anyone can “look as a fashion model” because we will be able to create a personal AI avatar to see how clothes look and fit.

However, she says that we are “not interested in taking out the society, and not interested in the AI model, as it is very inaccessible and we know that it is not real” can reach the stage of “.