Product Design
ROleProduct · Research · Usability
ToolsFigma · UserTesting
FocusRetail technology / B2B Product concept
Timeline3 months
01 - My Hypothesis02 - ResearchI conducted interviews with 4 shoppers who regularly purchase clothing both online and in stores. Participants ranged from ages 30–42 and represented a mix of shopping habits. Three clear patterns emerged.
"I'll order two sizes just in case and return one."
Participants frequently purchased multiple sizes or avoided buying online entirely because they couldn't accurately predict fit. This directly increases return volume and shipping costs.
"I'd rather take something home and return it than use a fitting room."
Shoppers describe fitting rooms as inconvenient when trying multiple outfits, and often abandon potential purchases rather than repeatedly entering and exiting.
"I wish I could see how pieces work together before buying them."
Users were less interested in visualizing individual garments and more interested in seeing complete outfits — suggesting an opportunity to support style exploration, not just fit verification.
03 - The Problem
How Might We04 - Early ConceptReal-time virtual try-on
The ability to preview complete outfits rather than individual pieces
Artificial Intelligence that could suggest styles based on someone's actual body proportions.
Feels the clothes don’t fit or flatter her body shape
A way to make getting dressed feel less overwhelming
Not frictionless
Not familiar
Not accessible
05 - Competitive LandscapeI wanted to understand what already existed so I could identify where the real gaps were and make deliberate decisions about what TrueStyle should and shouldn't try to solve.
| Google Virtual Try-On |
Walmart Zeekit |
Amazon Virtual Try-On |
Snapchat AR Shopping |
DeepAR | ThredX | Zyler | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Try-On Experience | |||||||
| Try-on with own photoUpload selfie to preview garments | |||||||
| AR-based try-onLive camera overlay, not just photo | |||||||
| Body-fit accuracyFabric draping + proportions rendered | |||||||
| Full outfit buildingCombine multiple pieces as one look | |||||||
| Style Planning & Suggestions | |||||||
| AI style recommendationsSuggestions based on body & taste | |||||||
| Digital wardrobeSave & organize owned clothing | |||||||
| Retail Integration & Commerce | |||||||
| Direct purchase / checkoutBuy without leaving the try-on flow | |||||||
| Integrates with retail storesB2B solution for physical retailers | |||||||
After evaluating feasibility, I realized the hardware alone would make an in-home product inaccessible. That constraint became the catalyst for a stronger, more scalable direction.
A consumer product for the bedroom — the mirror knows your wardrobe, suggests outfits, and lets you try on clothes virtually every morning.
$2,500 – $8,000 per unitA B2B SaaS platform for retailers — the technology is shared, costs distributed, and the experience integrates directly into the shopping environment.
Retailer leases hardware + subscription
I had experience designing vertical touchscreen kiosks, but had never designed for a six-foot mirror. Unlike a kiosk where the screen is the primary focus, a mirror requires the user to see themselves clearly, overlaying UI elements across the body would directly interfere with the core experience.
This meant the interface had to live at the edges of the mirror, keeping the center completely clear for the AR visualization.
"A standard kiosk assumes a standing adult at arm's length, a mirror is used in place. I had to design for shorter users, children, and wheelchair users who may not reach controls placed too high."
Then I realized, a touch solution wasn’t the answer either. A large touch mirror interface in a public space would accumulate fingerprints immediately and ruin the premium experience. I decided on gesture-based navigation as the primary input method. Gestures felt like the natural fit for this surface. It kept the experience hands-first rather than screen-first, which aligned with how people naturally behave in front of a mirror.
This turned out to be one of the more interesting findings from user testing. Going in, I expected gesture navigation to be the biggest point of confusion. But testers picked it up quickly and found it natural. The friction was elsewhere, which led to the QR code checkout solution. It was a good reminder to not make assumptions about your users.
Navigation and controls anchored low and to the sides, center stage reserved for the body and AR overlay.
Gesture navigation enables for a fuller range of users including shorter individuals, children, and wheelchair users.
Gestures kept the experience hands-first rather than screen-first, aligned with how people behave at a mirror.
Touch navigation on a large public mirror accumulates fingerprints across the UI immediately, gestures solve this.
The mobile experience lets shoppers experiment with clothing and build outfits at home. Users first generate a personalized digital avatar based on body measurements and reference photos, creating a simplified 3D body model that represents their shape.
Once the avatar is created, shoppers can browse items and preview how they appear. Rather than focusing on individual garments, the experience encourages experimenting with complete outfits and exploring new styles with less risk.
Testing revealed three clear friction points in the mirror experience. The pattern pointed to a single root cause: the mirror was being asked to do too much.
Users didn't know how to complete a purchase from the mirror interface.
Users couldn't figure out how to remove a garment, and honestly neither could I.
Users asked for totals, tax, and payment details, all on the mirror screen.
More information on the mirror sounds reasonable, but on a large public screen it would clutter the interface, extend session time, and create longer lines.
The solution was the QR code handoff. At the end of a try-on session, the mirror generates a QR code. The shopper scans it with their phone, and checkout completes on their own device, privately, quickly, and without occupying the mirror.
One unexpected finding: gesture navigation, which I expected to be the biggest point of confusion, was actually picked up quickly. Testers found it natural. A good reminder not to make assumptions about your users.
What would happen if they had 10 items in their cart? Would they have to scroll a life size screen?
Completely eliminated the “cart” screen, and moved everything to the mobile experience via QR code
TrueStyle streamlines the try-on process through virtual fitting both at home and in-store, helping shoppers make more confident decisions.
Virtual try-on reduces reliance on fitting rooms, helping shoppers move through the store more efficiently while engaging with more products.
TrueStyle generates revenue from both the retailer (B2B) and the shopper (B2C), creating multiple touchpoints across the in-store and mobile experience.
Retailers lease pre-configured smart mirror units rather than purchasing outright, lowering the barrier to entry and creating predictable recurring revenue.
Monthly SaaS fee gives retailers access to avatar generation, AR visualization, content management tools, and real-time analytics dashboards.
The companion app is free to download. Premium unlocks AI styling suggestions, unlimited virtual try-ons, and cross-retailer wardrobe syncing.
Anonymized, aggregated shopper behavior data — what's tried on, what converts, what's abandoned — sold as premium analytics to retailers and brands.
Map and refine the end-to-end journey to ensure try-on and checkout is intuitive, fast, and frictionless.
Redesign to clearly guide users through gesture-based interactions while remaining minimal and mirror-first.
Using a large-format display, Unity, and C#, build a working AR mirror that overlays virtual clothing on a live camera feed.
Conduct moderated testing sessions to evaluate usability, engagement, and perceived value of the AR try-on experience.
Interested in the process? View my process below