The look's props

A lookbook is rarely one dress. It is a dress, a chain, a pair of drops, a bag — and, increasingly, the stool your house shoots everything on. Those pieces already travelled with every frame. What they did not have was a name.

Without one, two necklaces in the same look compiled the same sentence twice: "the jewelry shown in reference image 2" and "the jewelry shown in reference image 3" — one instruction, pointing at two different photographs, and the model free to pick. Now each piece rides under the name your library already knows it by.

The look's props →

Your pieces travel by name

You do not type the name. Every image you upload is read when it lands, free, and filed with a plain-English noun — "gold chain necklace", "ivory slip dress". That noun is what goes into the frame's instructions:

The model wears the ivory slip dress shown in reference image 1, the gold chain shown in reference image 2 and the pearl drops shown in reference image 3.

Two necklaces, two sentences, two pictures. Nothing is invented at the moment of generation — if a piece never got a usable name (a stray IMG_4471.jpg that skipped the read), the frame falls back to describing it by its role, exactly as it always did. A filename never reaches the model.

This fixes garments as readily as jewellery. A look carrying two tops had the same problem and nobody had noticed.

How the house filed your pieces, and how to correct it

Under your chosen pieces the house shows what it decided each one is — the grammar slot it fills in the frame. Most of them it read: a piece tagged as jewellery is jewellery, and there is nothing for you to do.

Some it guessed. A scarf, a belt and a hat all arrive as "clothes", and the house files them as the outfit — which would make the frame describe your scarf as the garment. Those carry a single magenta hairline, and that is the only place colour appears here. A look the house read confidently shows none at all.

Tap the chip and choose the right one. The correction crosses the old word out and the new one is already behind it.

Your own furniture

A set piece is the one thing in a look that nobody wears: the velvet sofa, the ash stool, the one chair your house shoots on. File a photograph of it in your library as a set piece and it becomes castable exactly like a garment.

What that gets you:

• It rides every frame of the look as a reference image, and the instruction says plainly that it is furniture in the room rather than something she is wearing.
• It is held to its own photograph — same form, same proportions, same materials. Not a plausible sofa. That sofa.
• It costs one of your six pieces, and it never quietly yields to make room for something else. If the look is too full, you are told, rather than handed a frame missing the thing you cast.
• A close crop from collarbone to hip drops it, because that frame cannot show it. A knee-down crop keeps it, because a stool's legs are exactly what is in that shot.

And when you cast nothing, nothing appears. A look with no set piece now carries an explicit instruction not to invent a chair, a stool, a plinth or a table. That was the old failure nobody could name: the same shoot coming back with four different pieces of furniture across four frames, because a seated pose implies a seat and the model was free to imagine one.

What the judge can now see

The house grades every frame against the references it was actually handed, and it carries four of them into that reading. Two things changed.

It no longer asks about what it cannot see. The comparison "is this your model?" is worth 25 points — the heaviest thing we grade — and it was being asked even in the rare case where your model's photograph never reached the reader (a full-size camera file gets dropped for size before the reading starts). A question with nothing to compare against does not produce a careful answer; it produces silence, and silence scores a clean 100. Those questions are now withdrawn when their subject is absent, the same way the mark's and the pose's already were.

A swapped piece is described as a piece. The verdict has always read "not the piece you sent", but the fix sent back to the model used to say "same neckline, sleeves, length" — about a necklace. It now says the same object, the same shape, the same materials, the same details, which is true of a dress, a chain, a bag and a sofa alike.

Frames graded from this release carry rubric 8. Scores before and after it are not averaged together, because the questions asked are not the same set.

What it costs

Nothing new. A prop is a piece on a frame you are already paying for, the reading of your pieces is free, and the grading has always been free. No new price appears anywhere for any of this.

What is not here yet

• A piece that follows you between lookbooks. Your set piece is cast per look today. A house signature that offers itself when you open the next lookbook is the next step, not this one.
• Frame-to-frame comparison. "Is the necklace in frame 7 the necklace?" is answered per frame against your photograph, and a look holds if every frame holds. What still needs a genuine cross-frame reading — the ground shifting, the light drifting — is owed and named.
• Creating a lookbook from chat. Props reach the chat like any other piece, but no chat tool creates a look yet. That gap is older than this feature and we would rather say so than imply otherwise.