The Tamesis
Billot treats these outputs as designs, which it then attempts to recreate through material garments—effectively upending the most common AI-assisted design processes, allowing the AI to be the designer and humans to execute.
“I don’t think AI is just a tool. I think you can use it as a tool, but I think it’s a waste of energy and almost an unsustainable way to use AI,” Bilott said. “But I also don’t want to say it’s a design partner, because that means it’s almost like a human being and there’s something magical about it, whereas when I work with artificial intelligence, there’s nothing weird about it.”
“Instead, I would say it is a material that is acceptable because it has some limitations and properties,” he added. “If we start eliminating those attributes, then I don’t think we have a reason to work with AI.”
contrary to human creativity
Contrary to Bilott’s view, several designers believe that in the era of artificial intelligence, human creativity should be strictly protected and all creative efforts should not be affected by technology.
Greek designer Dimitra Petsa of Di Petsa said after her London show in February that she believed artificial intelligence was a tool the industry should be very careful about.
“I think it’s interesting that we always see technology advance faster than the ethical debate surrounding it,” Pesa said. “Aesthetics and creativity are things that are deeply ingrained in humans, and I personally feel that AI will never be able to sense when a design is relevant, how it fits into the history of fashion, and how it interprets from an aesthetic philosophy perspective; I feel like that’s all too complex, too human, and too abstract.”
While she acknowledged that AI is “not going anywhere” and has the potential to help more operational parts of creative businesses, Petsa predicted that in the age of AI, consumers will increasingly gravitate toward tactile and tangible products.
