Same garment. Same brief. One variable.
Eleven garments, three frames each: the photograph you would send us, what a generic AI clothing model generator hands back, and the file we deliver. Same garment file on both renders, same scene brief, same preset model library.
Both runs used the same 60 garment photographs, the same preset model library and the same scene brief. The generic column still receives the garment coverage sentence, because without it a top comes back as a dress and the row would be measuring nothing. What it does not receive is the styling rules, the coordinated outfit palette, or the color correction applied to the delivered pixels.
Seven of the eleven rows are matched pairs: both runs drew the same model photograph, so the two frames differ by one thing. The other four are rows where the generic run returned no product at all, which is not a question about the model, and they say so in their own notes. Frames are resized for this page and nothing else is done to them.
Not a resolution test The generic column returns 864 x 1184 on our plan and cannot be asked for more, while ours delivers 1792 x 2400. At the same display width it is carrying about a quarter of the pixels.
Not a vendor's own product We ran a virtual-model API with our rule layer removed, which is a configuration nobody sells, so the column is named for what it is.
Totals are for the whole 60-garment women’s run on each side, not for the eleven rows below.
What goes wrong in an unchecked AI clothing model run?
- 14
garments never came back at all. We delivered all 60.
- 13
of those 14 were dresses. Of the 17 one-piece garments in the set it returned 4.
- 7
of the 46 frames it did return have no product in them: a lace dress as a plain polo and trousers, a denim miniskirt as printed wide trousers, a silk shirt as a plain tee, a midi skirt as a crop top, a cape top as a gray tee, a lace-hem skirt as a cardigan, a metallic crop top as a printed T-shirt.
- 1
more came back with half the product: a full-length printed piece as a short shirt and jeans.
- 0
frames carry a color measurement, a source reference, or anything you could take to a supplier.
Every line counted off the delivered files of one 60-garment run.
Denim cape top
Wrong garment, and we missed itWe are opening with the row we would rather not print. The generic run replaces the cape top with a plain gray tee and keeps only the trousers, and our own check passed that frame as good. A check that reads color, framing and backdrop can still miss a garment that has been swapped for a different one.
Lace-hem midi skirt
Product absentThe product is the lace-hemmed skirt. The generic run returns a plain cardigan over off-white trousers, with no skirt anywhere in the frame. Ours keeps the skirt and its lace hem.
Cotton and nylon puffer
Wrong modelRead the first two frames as one. Same face, same dark sunglasses, same black trousers, same open-toe mules: the generic run handed back the garment photograph with a new backdrop behind it, so the model a job selects turns out to be advisory. Ours puts the puffer on the model that was picked. On a catalog page the face has to be the one you chose, not the one your supplier happened to book.
Denim miniskirt
Product absentThe product is a short dark denim skirt. The generic run returns gray wide-leg trousers with a dark red splatter print on them, a garment that appears nowhere in the photograph it was given. Ours returns the skirt. The two runs drew different models here, which changes nothing about a skirt that is not in the frame.
Printed shirtdress
Length lostA printed shirtdress that runs to the ankle. The generic run returns a short shirt over blue jeans, so the entire lower half of the product is missing from its own product shot. Ours holds the length.
Lace-hem knit dress
Product absentA black knit dress with a scalloped lace hem and lace cuffs, ankle length. The generic run returns a plain black polo shirt and plain black trousers: not the dress, not its lace, not its length. Ours returns the dress. The two runs drew different models here, which changes nothing about a dress that is not in the frame.
Twist front sundress
Color issueBoth runs delivered the dress, and the color is where they part. Sampled on the same patch of skirt, the generic frame sits 4.33 ΔE00 from the garment and pulls the rust toward orange; ours sits 2.87. Center patch, not a garment mask, so read it as a direction.
Printed silk shirt
Product absentThe product is the shirt. The generic run keeps the printed trouser that shares the photograph and puts a plain olive T-shirt where the shirt should be, so a shirt listing comes back showing the trouser. Ours returns the shirt. The two runs drew different models here, which changes nothing about a shirt that is not in the frame.
Printed silk trouser
Top not generated properlyThe trouser from the same look as the row above, sold as its own listing. The trouser is right in both. The top is not: the generic run drops a plain white tank on it, unrelated to the garment it came with. Ours coordinates the printed top the trouser is sold with. Across a catalog page that difference is what makes a grid look styled or look assembled.
Asymmetric cotton skirt
Wrong sweep colorThe closest pair on the page, and the difference is the wall behind it. Both runs were sent the same brief asking for a cool neutral gray. Only one of them is cool.
Navy print trouser
Top not generated properlyThe same fault on a second listing. The trouser is right in both, and the generic run puts a plain gray tee above it while the garment photograph has a matching printed shirt. Two listings from one collection, two different improvised tops.
Run this on your garments.
Send five, including the ones you would not put on a site. You get the same three frames on your own product: your photograph, the raw return, and the delivered file with the measured color difference attached.
100+ creatives a month · 5 to 7 day turnaround · a failed item is not charged