This quote popped up in another thread.  Apparently a "client" posted this
at a warez site where content is shared illegally.

"good share, shame the kids look so dated. why do they dress
these american kids up in such old and bad fashions...I know
most Americans get clothes from Walmart, but these fake stock
kids would be a last resort for any client job....thanks for upload
....but I need REAL pictures of REAL people.not just badly dressed
models....I see a gap in the market!!!Stock Photographers - any
balls, ??!!??"

Aside from the absurdity of complaining to content providers about
the quality of the stolen content which s/he is enjoying, does this
person have a legitimate complaint?

I rather think that stock, royalty-free images will always tend to contain
bland, Walmart-ish no-name apparel, for reasons of not violating trademarks
or copyrights.

Or maybe what the "client" was complaining about really was 5- or
10-year-old content, and it's just whinging because the latest and most
trendy stock images have not yet been ripped off and shared.

In any case, would anyone care to share some tips about dressing models
for microstock?  Is it Walmart or bust?  Or do you aim for trendy, but
understated fashions from more hip outlets?  I.e. with small or non-existent
logos/labels and without truly distinctive patterns or prints. 

I assume that someone actually plugged into the retail clothing industry
would be able to recognize practically anyone's products in a second based
on color, cut, etc., but the question is, where is the happy medium between
trendy/bland?

I would think the more generic the better. If I could produce a lifestyle shot that would still sell 10 years from now I would be very happy. A designer emailed me once when I first started and said something like: "If you get rid of the jewelry you will have a longer shelf life and reach more buyers". So anything that can date an image might not be such a good thing in the long run. to each his own though.

Or if you only shoot nekkid (Adult) people there won't be a problem either 

But my most recent work heavily involves jewelry. As a matter of fact the gems were the primary purpose of the shoot.

True a '2007' item would be so 10 minutes ago  !  How retro.

Yes, in all seriousness I understand what you mean.
I guess Yuri runs the same risk shooting business folk in suits.
If the fashion in suit lapels or ties changes drastically in a year or so, there goes the saleability.

But I suppose that is the nature of the beast.