I agree, but I think Daniel tackles different themes each season and doesn’t do back

Must've been amazing! Brands should show off their haute couture more like that in exhibition formats, maybe not at museums but at their own locations for people to go see

@@fashionlover4 Fashion museums should so be a regular thing. Every time i see avant garde campy runways like schiaparelli i always wonder what happens to the pieces that dont get talked about and aren’t ever seen in the public again. Luxury brands, haute couture or not, should definitely open exhibitions to the public with archived runway pieces

OMG, I went to that last year and had half a mind to just grab the accessories and make a run for it. Lol

based comment

🤣🤣🤣

Agree 👏👏

He stated that his current favorite is Kiko Kostadinov. Try watch his videos on him from months ago.

Happy to help! I'm more into menswear so keep that in mind but my favourites would be kiko kostadinov, Y Project and Comme des Garcons!

That's so kind thank you!

Fascinating! Thanks for sharing

For sure, it definitely evokes a similar feeling to McQueen's shows.

The issue lots of people have with Chanel and Dior's current designers is that as designers, they have virtually nothing to say to the modern fashion consumer. They see the clothes as very "timeless and wearable", but void of a true artistic vision and dated. It's similar to how Haute Couture was in the 80s and early to mid 90s. The clothes presented in those shows were very wearable, but they only appealed to a shrinking, aging clientele that were far removed from the fashion zeitgeist. Today, those houses either had gone through a hard reset in the late 90s/early 00s (Dior, Givenchy) or their couture divisions have been permanently shut down (Saint Laurent, Nina Ricci). This safeness might work for this generation, but when their clientele starts dying off, they'll be forced to start pushing the envelope again or risk becoming irrelevant. Long story short, designers like Daniel Roseberry keep haute couture from becoming the dusty, impractical art of selling dusty, expensive clothing to dusty, old rich women.

​@@ladyjunon6305 The dusty old women are a stereotype. The Park Avenue "ladies who lunch" really haven't bought Couture since the 80s. It's too expensive even for them. They may buy the occasional piece for an important gala or whatever, but as a rule it's too expensive, and they're too busy. Couture is a serious time commitment. Even "society ladies" are too busy chairing foundations and such to either fly to Paris for multiple fittings, or hang around for a couple of weeks while their pieces are made up. The market for Couture today is almost exclusively Asian and Middle Eastern. They don't generally just buy grand occasion pieces. The stuff they buy is much more everyday. Beautiful suits, cocktail dresses, etc. That's really where the market is today, at least in terms of people who actually buy the clothes, rather than people who are loaned or gifted them. (Celebrities.) While I'm somewhat nostalgic for the days of Gaultier Paris and McQueen at Givenchy, Those spectacular, outlandish pieces were worn once, or in a lot of cases, never worn. It was Couture as spectator sport. It was not remotely client driven. It was about advertising fragrances and handbags. In this day and age, we shouldn't be glamorizing waste in fashion. I don't care if it's Shein or Chanel Couture, I don't want to see clothes that are only going to be worn once or twice. I get that safe collections make for boring watching, but they're pieces that the actual clients will wear over and over again. In person, they're still pretty spectacular. There's been a shift from grand gestures, to more intimate clothes. (I've always said you can't judge a Chanel Couture collection until you've actually touched the clothes. The workmanship is exquisite.) That kind of intimacy is truly luxurious. Those clothes aren't about impressing armchair fashion critics at home who shop at Zara. They're about impressing connoisseurs who truly understand the craft involved. It's about making someone's new favorite dress. Runway as extreme spectacle is dead, and likely won't come back. The few houses that still do that are younger houses building brand recognition. (True, Schiaparelli isn't a young house, but it was dormant for generations, and has had a hard time getting the kind of exposure it needs to sell purses etc. They need to go BIG to get the kind of name recognition that sells purses to women in Flyover.) More established houses are increasingly more interested in creating their client's favorite dress that she will wear for ages. Historically, that's what Couture has been about.

He was supposed to but that collection fell through and never properly came out

I admit I was a bit lazy editing this video, my bad

No not really. Have you seen any brand do such absurd ideas on the runway? That's why these clothes are something special. You rarely see such intricate stuff.

You don't know the difference between haute couture and rtw?

@@rodrigombl452 thats why i asked

Haute Couture is more exclusive yes, but generally haute couture clothing is better made and more ambitious as they have bigger budgets and aren't going to be mass produced although in my opinion as I pointed out many haute couture shows don't really hit like that and just feel like typical ready-to-wear shows.