Fine tailoring and whimsical detail were at the heart of the collection by Caroline Engelgaar's MKDT Studio. Photograph (above) by Jay Zoo for DAM
One of the highlights of Copenhagen Fashion Week was MKDT Studio’s Spring/Summer 2026 collection which explores the space between memory and imagination, where the familiar is
reshaped into something subtly unexpected. With a focus on form, texture, and
the art of imperfection, the season reflects a deliberate play between
structure and fluidity. It is a study in how clothing can feel both precise and
instinctive, grounded in tradition yet open to reinvention. Story by Jeanne-Marie Cilento. Photography by Jay Zoo
Crisp white, high-collared shirt
with a long, loose cream jacket.
CREATIVE Director Caroline Engelgaar examines the fine line
between the familiar and the unfamiliar with her new MKDT collection where precision tailoring meets subtle disruption. She uses the season to challenge perceptions of polish, introducing
garments that appear immaculate at first glance but reveal intentional differences on closer inspection.
Founded in 2014, the label's collections are designed and developed in Engelgaar's Copenhagen atelier. This season's Echoes of the
Known, takes its cues from two seemingly unrelated sources: the surreal
landscapes of American painter Kay Sage and the AI-generated work of Jean Jacques Balzac. Both artists create spaces that are
almost real, yet subtly distorted, a concept Caroline
Engelgaar applies to the brand’s tailoring.
Structured blazers,
sculpted trousers, and fitted dresses remain at the core, but are reworked with seams that open to reveal
skin while uncut threads disrupt the polish creating garments that appear at
once refined and undone.
The collection’s colour palette of black, mink, ivory, and stone is lightened with pastels such as sage, yellow, and grey which soften the architectural silhouettes. Fabric innovation plays a key
role, with shredded ramie forming three-dimensional check patterns, woven bands
integrating into sleeves and skirt lines, and the interplay of natural fibres
like hemp-linen, and cotton calico with wool and silk blends. The result is a tactile, layered collection that
shifts between softness and rigidity.
Collaboration remains a defining feature of the season too.
Dahlman1807 contributes a sculptural new belt design, while Parisian shoemaker
Calla transforms MKDT Studio’s own production cutoffs into fringed babouches.
The label also enlarges its denim, adding the high-waisted
cigarette-style pants and cropped, voluminous pieces. Rather than revisit
the past with sentimentality, Echoes of the Known approaches reconnection as an
act of looking closely, reconstructing meaning from existing forms and finding
interest in the deliberate, almost imperceptible, deviations from the expected.
Scroll down to see more highlights from the MKDT Studio SS26 collection in Copenhagen
Backstage before the Rolf Ekroth SS26 show, models wear the designer's signature, padded vest with tulips in vivid hues of fuchsia. Photograph by Andrea Heinsohn for DAM
Copenhagen Fashion Week’s Spring/Summer 2026 schedule
brought together a broad range of visions, but Finnish designer Rolf Ekroth’s
189 Days Later – Encore stood out for its measured blend of conceptual depth
and wearable execution, writes Jeanne-Marie Cilento. Backstage and runway photography by Andrea Heinsohn
Rolf Ekoth's show was held in a woodland,
which enhanced the otherworldly aesthetic.
ROLF Ekroth's new collection worked through themes of renewal, revisiting designs to refine and evolve them rather than presenting
a retrospective Staged in the lush Refshaleøen forest, the show signalled a lighter and more pragmatic turn for the label.
Core influences ranged from Nineties British street style to the
cinematic tension of horror film soundtracks, with nods to The Sopranos and the
designer’s own methodical working process. Utilitarian outerwear, detailed
handwork, and inventive upcycling anchored the line-up, offering a balance
between function and craft.
The collection’s technical execution was equally notable,
with Japanese nylon, coated cotton, and repurposed vintage denim transformed
into silhouettes that alternated between structured and fluid. Highlights
included hand-sewn pearl garments, padded shirts with sportswear references,
and the return of the brand’s signature rescue vest in newly sculpted forms.
A
collaboration with Finland’s Lounais-Suomen Jätehuolto gave discarded textiles
a second life, turning waste into runway material. Prints by long-time
collaborator Matilda Diletta introduced bold fuchsia tulips and abstract
flames, contrasting with muted greys, blues, and bursts of emergency orange.
Whether through laser-cut breathing holes, 1,000-pin flame motifs, or 15,000
pearls applied by hand, the detail work reinforced the season’s message:
progress comes through precise, deliberate design. In this forest setting, Ekroth delivered a confident evolution of his ideas that pushed his vision forward without
abandoning the foundations of his work.
See all the highlights below from backstage and the runway of Rolf Ekroth's SS26 show
There are many certifications in the fashion industry, but they are not foolproof. A label might promise ethical sourcing but that does not guarantee transparency or prove that every step was sustainable.
By Aayushi Badhwar
Today’s consumers are swimming in a sea of information. Products are marketed with big, bold words such as “sustainable”, “ethical” and “organic”. They sound good, they catch our attention, and they make us feel better about what we buy.
The reality is, in today’s market, figuring out which claims are true is no easy task.
One big reason is greenwashing, when brands use these buzzwords to sell products without living up to what the words actually mean. In fashion especially, these terms are thrown around so often that their meaning has been watered down. Instead of being about genuine change, they are often just a sales tool.
So, how can you know what to look out for?
Who should take responsibility for green claims?
Greenwashing takes many forms. Sometimes brands know they are misleading; this is direct greenwashing. Other times, it’s indirect, when brands simply do not know the full story of their own supply chains. A T-shirt, for example, might start as raw cotton in one country, get processed into fabric in another, sewn into a garment, and then shipped overseas for sale.
At each stage, there are different suppliers, factories and workers. The brand has limited visibility over what happens in these tiers. When a brand claims it produces ethically, but does not, that is greenwashing. If it involves exploitation or forced labour, it then becomes modern slavery, turning greenwashing into something more dangerous.
This raises a big question: who is responsible? The obvious answer is the brands. They design, order, and sell the products, and they profit from them. Consumers are paying for these goods, so they should have access to credible information, not just vague claims or nice-sounding labels.
The fashion industry is constantly in the spotlight for problems in its supply chains. Stories about poor working conditions, environmental damage, and lack of transparency pop up all the time. But just like a viral trend on social media, the attention often fades quickly, and people move on to the next story.
Certifications aren’t perfect
There are many certifications in the fashion industry trying to help, but they are not foolproof. A label might promise ethical sourcing, but that does not guarantee transparency or prove that every step was ethical.
A large portion of China’s cotton comes from the Xinjiang region, which has long been linked to forced labour; concerns were highlighted in a United Nations report in 2022. Another example is deforestation in Brazil, where cotton from affected areas was certified under the “Better Cotton” scheme. Many major brands – like ASICS producing the Australian Olympic uniforms – have faced scrutiny for sourcing cotton from controversial regions.
Tracing global supply chains is hard. But the responsibility does not disappear just because it’s complicated.
In Australia, the Modern Slavery Act took effect in January 2019 to tackle issues such as forced labour and exploitation. Penalties include heavy fines or jail time.
However, there is a major loophole, as only companies with an annual revenue over A$100 million are required to report under the act. For big corporations, even if they are caught, the penalty can be tiny compared to the profits they have made.
This is not just an Australian problem, it’s global. For example, luxury brand Dior was placed under judicial administration after being found negligent for failing to act against worker exploitation in its subcontracted supply chain in Italy. The pattern is often the same; a company gets accused, sometimes even fined, but the cost is minimal compared to their annual revenue, so it’s barely a setback.
Is there a role for government?
So, should the responsibility rest only with brands? Not entirely. Governments also benefit from these companies through taxes and trade. They profit indirectly when the companies profit, and they benefit from the jobs these companies provide.
A stronger approach would involve government bodies and brands working with supply chain mapping companies, such as Textile Genesis, TrusTrace or FibreTrace. These platforms, often powered by blockchain and artificial intelligence, track a product through every stage of production.
Blockchain – which uses a decentralised database – can be a game changer.
Unlike websites or paper trails, blockchain data cannot be altered without leaving trace. Once recorded, the information is permanent, and it can be shared across manufacturers, brands and government bodies to maintain real-time disclosure.
When products enter a country, the ethical claims behind them could be verified in real time, instead of relying on brands to respond after an allegation is made.
The upfront cost is high and adoption might be slow. But in the long run it could save money on compliance, audits and damage control, while also building consumer trust.
Brands would still make profits, but consumers would have the confidence the products they are buying live up to the claims. Instead of government agencies being passive players, they would actively enforce that products meet the standards consumers expect.
In short, brands need to be held accountable, but so do governments. Greenwashing, modern slavery, and unethical sourcing will keep slipping through the cracks, unless they both work together.
The tools to make the fashion industry more transparent and honest already exist; it’s just a matter of using them.
Aayushi Badhwar, Lecturer in Enterprise and Technology, RMIT University
