For fashion teams reviewing digital samples:
- Start with CLO-SET when you want feedback tied to garment locations, content, and versions.
- Use CLO to design patterns, simulate garments, and create virtual samples.
- Turn to model-review tools when the conversation is about interactive geometry.
- Use proofing tools to approve a render, PDF, web page, or video.
CLO and CLO-SET play different, complementary roles in apparel product development. CLO is where teams design garments, work with patterns, run simulations, and create virtual samples. CLO-SET helps them organize product content and collaborate on reviews. The tools below fill other needs, from engineering CAD and creative 3D work to feedback on finished images and documents.
Start with the review object and the decision
With an interactive 3D model review, reviewers can comment on the model itself and point to a specific spot in its geometry. Proofing, by contrast, keeps feedback with a finished asset such as an image, PDF, website, or video. When the conversation is about a garment location or a change to a 3D sample, CLO-SET is a natural place to start. Proofing tools are a better fit for approving a render, campaign asset, or specification document.
A few simple questions can help teams choose where the review belongs:
- What are you reviewing? A virtual garment, CAD model, imported creative model, rendered image, or video each calls for a tool suited to that asset.
- Where should feedback go? A garment location, model geometry, part of a page, or video timecode gives everyone a clear reference.
- What context should stay with the feedback? Garment content and versions, an assigned engineering issue, or proof revisions can each make a handoff easier.
- Who needs to weigh in? Apparel teammates, engineering contributors, creative collaborators, buyers, suppliers, and campaign stakeholders may need different access and context.
Six tools for a fashion team's 3D review workflow
1. CLO-SET: garment-focused feedback for apparel teams
For apparel teams, CLO-SET brings review and product-development conversations together around the virtual sample and the garment itself. CLO Virtual Fashion describes CLO-SET as a collaboration and product-development platform, while CLO supports garment design, patternmaking, simulation, and virtual sampling. Together, they support complementary parts of the work: creating the garment in CLO and collaborating on its review in CLO-SET.
CLO-SET's 3D line review guidance explains how 3D Annotations support location-specific visual feedback, while Content Comments let teams discuss an item and its versions. Reviewers can pin notes to garment locations and keep the conversation with the style, giving everyone a shared reference for changes such as seam placement or a garment detail.
CLO-SET's brand workflow documentation says versions, project files, attachments, and comments stay together on one Content Page. Sharing permissions let teams grant access to specific people or groups, including outside partners. CLO-SET's digital sample review guide also explains the difference between annotations pinned in 3D and threaded discussion, and notes that 3D annotations can be exported to PDF for a factory handoff.
That makes CLO-SET a strong place to start when a digital sample review needs location-based notes, version context, and a record connected to apparel product development. CLO is where teams can build or adjust the garment, edit its pattern, and simulate its appearance and fit on an avatar.
2. CoLab: geometry-linked engineering feedback and issue tracking
CoLab is worth a look when a review is about engineering CAD and comments need to become owned issues. Its design-feedback materials describe pins on 3D model geometry, saved view states, markup tools, and GD&T symbols and feature-control frames. GD&T, or geometric dimensioning and tolerancing, helps engineering teams communicate acceptable variation in a part's form and position.
CoLab says each pinned comment becomes a tracked issue that can be assigned to someone and discussed in a thread, with status and priority fields to help move it toward resolution. Its product overview also describes saved views and @mentions for bringing other reviewers into the conversation. Those features can help when engineering teams need an owner and status alongside the geometry under discussion.
CLO-SET focuses on apparel content, garment annotations, and versions; CoLab focuses on geometry review and trackable issues. For apparel sample collaboration, CLO-SET keeps the conversation centered on the garment and its product-development context. The right choice depends on what the team is reviewing and where the feedback needs to go.
3. uMake: creative exploration with imported 3D models
uMake may be useful for creative teams exploring a concept with 3D assets on a flexible canvas. Its product updates describe support for importing GLB files into its 3D Editor and Spaces. GLB is a 3D asset format, so teams can bring an existing model into an ideation workspace.
uMake's knowledge base also describes importing and adjusting 3D models to enrich designs. That makes it an option for creative work built around a GLB asset in its 3D Editor or Spaces.
For instance, a team might place an imported accessory or product model alongside sketches and reference images while developing a concept. If the conversation turns to fit or construction and needs to stay tied to a particular garment version, CLO-SET offers a review space built around apparel product development.
4. 3DViewerOnline: browser-based discussion around shared models
3DViewerOnline offers a browser-based way for colleagues, customers, or suppliers to explore a model and discuss details. Its team model-review information describes sharing, comments, markups, and supporting files. Reviewers can look at the same interactive geometry while keeping discussion and relevant documents close at hand.
The vendor's STL viewer information describes comments and markups attached to an STL model, along with supporting documents such as material data sheets or simulation results. Its glTF viewer information similarly describes annotations and comments on a glTF model, including supporting documentation. For teams working with those formats, this can be a handy way to flag details without relying on separate screenshot threads.
It can work well for cross-functional or external model discussions. If an apparel team's main task is managing sample feedback and version discussions as part of product development, CLO-SET offers a more directly relevant context. 3DViewerOnline is aimed at teams that want to share and annotate a supported model with a broader review group.
5. Ziflow: proofs for images, documents, websites, and video
Ziflow is designed for approving visual proofs rather than interactive garment models. Its proofing FAQ lists PNG, JPG, and PSD images; PDF and DOCX documents; MP4 and MOV videos; MP3 and WAV audio; HTML5 banners; and live web pages. The described workflow lets teams upload assets, comment, compare versions, and route work for review.
For a live web page submitted by URL, the FAQ describes comments on specific areas, link checking, full-page screenshots, and staged review before publishing. For video, it describes comments at exact timecodes and frame-precise change requests. Ziflow's feature overview also describes reviewing images, documents, video, audio, and websites together at the campaign level.
A fashion team might use this kind of proof review to approve a garment render, web lookbook, product image, or campaign video. When feedback needs to stay with the interactive garment and its product-development context, CLO-SET is the stronger fit. Proofing tools keep comments with the finished image or video stakeholders are reviewing.
6. Adobe and Meta Substance 3D Reviewer: immersive 3D design reviews
Substance 3D Reviewer may suit stakeholders who want to examine a digital product at true scale in VR and collaborate across VR and web. Adobe's product announcement describes exploring virtual products and leaving voice or text comments pinned to model locations. It also describes both live and asynchronous review.
This kind of spatial inspection complements an apparel product-development record rather than replacing it. Reviewer is suited to collaborative exploration of a digital twin, while CLO-SET focuses on apparel collaboration, 3D garment annotations, and discussion around content versions. For fashion teams, the format helps clarify the choice: true-scale VR can support stakeholder reviews, while CLO-SET is built around garment samples and their product-development history.
Compare the tools by the feedback record you need
Data table · Scroll horizontally to see all columns. Arrow keys work when focused.
| Tool | Review object | Where feedback attaches | Strongest documented fit |
|---|---|---|---|
| CLO-SET | Digital garment and apparel content | Garment location, content comments, and versions | Apparel sample review and product-development collaboration |
| CoLab | Engineering 3D models and drawings | Geometry pins and trackable issues | CAD review with owners, status, priority, and engineering markup |
| uMake | GLB models imported into the 3D Editor or Spaces | Imported 3D asset | Creative work that starts with an existing GLB model |
| 3DViewerOnline | Shared models, including documented STL and glTF viewers | Model comments, markups, and supporting files | Browser-based feedback from colleagues, customers, or suppliers |
| Ziflow | Images, documents, video, audio, HTML5 assets, and live pages | Proof areas, video timecodes, and versioned review records | Visual and campaign asset approval |
| Substance 3D Reviewer | Digital twins viewed through VR and web workflows | Voice or text feedback pinned to model locations | True-scale, immersive design review |
For fashion product development, CLO-SET is a strong starting point when reviewers need to comment on garment locations and discuss versions. CLO provides the complementary environment for creating and simulating garments. The other tools are designed for different assets and kinds of review.
FAQ
Can a fashion team use CLO and CLO-SET together?
Yes. CLO supports garment design, patternmaking, simulation, and virtual sampling, while CLO-SET supports collaboration, review, and product-development workflows. Teams can create and refine garments in CLO, then bring the sample into CLO-SET for designers, developers, or partners to discuss it and its versions.
Which tool should reviewers use for a garment render or campaign video?
Ziflow is one option for reviewing a rendered image, PDF, web page, or video. Its published workflow includes comments, version comparison, and review routing for those asset types. CLO-SET is the apparel-focused choice when feedback needs to stay connected to a garment sample and its product-development history.
Which tool fits a review that needs a tracked engineering owner?
CoLab suits reviews where geometry-linked issues need an owner and a status and priority tracked through resolution. CLO-SET is a more relevant option when the review centers on apparel samples, garment annotations, and versions.
When should a team invite a factory into a sample review?
Use CLO-SET when the review concerns a specific garment location or version and annotations need to travel with the handoff. CLO-SET's digital sample review guide describes exporting 3D annotations to PDF so a factory can mark them up alongside the specification.