ゲームのキット制作から世界のサッカーレジェンドのSNSへ、トルコ人デザイナーKitmaker Baranが3年で証明した「制約の中にこそ創造がある」という哲学

From crafting kits for football video games to landing on the social media feeds of the world's soccer legends, Turkish designer Kitmaker Baran has spent three years proving a philosophy: "Creativity thrives within constraints."

Constraint breeds creation: from games to real clubs
What Turkish designer Kitmaker Baran has proven over three years is not that total freedom produces the best work, but ratherthat people create their best work where constraints existStarting from making fictional kits for PES and FIFA, he eventually reached a point where his work reaches footballing figures around the world. Behind that journey lies a thorough way of confronting constraints.

What lies beyond the jersey

In the single piece of fabric that players pull over their shoulders on the pitch, a club's history is stitched.

The width of the stripes, the placement of colours, the emblem etched on the chest.

These are not merely 'design' choices; they are an accumulation of memories that supporters have shared for decades.

So if you were to 'rethink that jersey from zero,' where would you even begin?

Kitmaker Baran, a kit designer based in Turkey, is someone who has placed exactly that question at the starting point of his own work.

It's said that it all began when he started making fictional jerseys for football games like PES and FIFA.

As he kept drawing kits with a reality so convincing they looked like something a real club might actually wear, that work eventually stepped outside the boundaries of the game itself.

Today he creates designs for actual clubs and content creators, and figures as prominent as Dries Mertens and Roberto Carlos have shared his work on social media.

'Making a beautiful jersey' alone wasn't enough

The core of what Baran describes in his creative process is not simply 'making a jersey that looks good.'

What he aims for, he says, is creating a moment where the person looking at the jersey can feel 'the atmosphere of that club.'

To achieve that, he arrived at an expressive method of draping his designs over the bodies of real players, letting them blend into the light of stadiums and cities.

The angle of light, the camera angle, the player's pose, the surrounding environment.

The sense that he treats all of these as 'part of the design' feels somewhat similar to how a player on the pitch thinks in terms of 'movement' and 'relationships.'

Cutting out only the moment a player receives the ball doesn't convey the meaning of the play.

Just as a single play is only complete when you include the context before and after, the positions of teammates, the balance of the opponent's body, for Baran a jersey is something to be designed together with 'the entire world in which it exists.'

A question that began on a game screen

The fact that he started from PES and FIFA may carry more depth than it first appears.

Making a jersey inside a football game is creation within complete freedom.

There's a space where you can design without worrying about contracts with clubs, sponsors' intentions, or the emotional backlash of supporters.

But even while spending a long time in that free space, Baran eventually moved toward the feeling that 'there are things you can only see within constraints.'

Take Galatasaray's jersey, for example, which he thinks about like this.

That club's identity is extremely strong; change it too much and you lose 'what makes Galatasaray Galatasaray,' but change it too little and you can't claim to have made anything new.

He says this exact tension is the hardest place to work in, and also the most rewarding.

This overlaps with the very structure of football itself.

How do you express yourself within tactical constraints?

How do you make judgments within the framework of a manager's instructions?

Finding the narrow path between 'doing exactly as told' and 'doing whatever you want.'

Baran takes on that difficulty every single time, in the form of design.

Listening to supporters' voices, but not obeying them

Baran says he references supporters' opinions when designing.

What they like, what dissatisfies them, what elements they feel nostalgic about.

He gathers that information to try to understand a club's identity.

But he states clearly that 'it doesn't mean making exactly what the supporters want.'

As a designer, he has his own perspective and judgment.

Sometimes he deliberately presents something supporters don't expect.

Because, in his view, 'good design is also about showing people something they didn't realise they wanted.'

Hearing this, some might picture the relationship between a coach and players.

Players voice things like 'I want to do this' or 'I don't like this' from within the game.

A coach listens to those voices, but ultimately makes the final decision based on their own judgment.

Baran describes taking on that responsibility as 'carrying the design on his own shoulders.'

What it means to render the France national team in adidas

One of Baran's occasional experiments, 'deliberately breaking an existing pairing,' is also fascinating.

For many football fans, the association of France's national team with Nike has become a given.

What happens when that 'given' is broken?

Baran tries to use that very surprise as the power of design.

When something familiar is shifted slightly, people finally 'see' it for the first time.

They realise that something that was always in view had, in fact, never truly been observed.

The moment France's jersey becomes adidas, we might finally start properly observing the France jersey for the first time.

Something similar happens in a football match.

An unusual position, a pass rarely attempted, an unfamiliar formation.

The surprise of 'why did they do that' sets the viewer's mind in motion.

What Baran does intentionally could be described as creating exactly that 'moment that sets the mind in motion.'

Starting from games, arriving at reality. But the destination is still further ahead

Baran currently holds a full-time job at Kappa Türkiye while continuing his activities as Kitmaker Baran.

Being involved in actual projects as part of a global sports brand is undoubtedly a major experience.

But he doesn't see it as the 'goal.'

He states plainly that 'Kappa Türkiye is just a stepping stone,' saying he has his sights set on even bigger brands and international stages.

This attitude structurally resembles the process of a young player aiming from a regional league to the J.League, and from the J.League toward Europe.

While doing his best where he is now, his gaze is fixed further ahead.

Rather than being satisfied with the present or rushing impatiently, he believes that accumulating experience here and now becomes the foundation for the next step.

It's said that it took three years for designs that began on a PES game screen to end up on the social media of legendary figures across world football.

Those three years probably weren't something he knew from the start would lead 'to this kind of place.'

While continuing to make kits for games, he gradually refined his style, tried, failed, tried again, and arrived where he is now.

What the jersey asks of us

When a concept kit imagining Real Madrid x Nike x Travis Scott gathered more than 810,000 likes, Baran says he felt that 'my design was no longer just mine.'

That was the moment his work opened up to the world, and at the same time, the moment expectations arose for 'what will he show us next.'

Continuing to meet those expectations is both pressure and fuel for creation.

Just as a player is asked season after season 'what will you show us this year,' Baran keeps placing himself in the position of asking each time, 'can I make something that surpasses what came before?'

A jersey remains even after the match is over.

Along with the memories of that season, the goals scored by the player wearing that jersey come to mind.

A jersey expresses a club's identity on a piece of fabric, but at the same time, it's also a place where the person looking at it overlays 'their own version of that club.'

What one sees in a single jersey differs entirely from person to person.

Baran is trying to render his own personal 'world' within that space.

What do you see within that jersey?

STORY TEE
One piece, for those who look deeply at aesthetics.
The depth of aesthetics, in a single piece. NEWDIH's STORY TEE collection.
View the TEE collection →

Does constraint really breed creation?

I'd like to raise one counterargument. The idea that constraint breeds creation certainly holds a valid side. But it doesn't apply to every kind of constraint.

Constraint only draws out creativity when placed upon someone with a strong will to 'overcome' it. The same constraint, given to someone without that motivation, is nothing more than a wall. In Baran's case, from the very start there was a motivation to keep pursuing 'a reality that looks like a real club is wearing it,' even within a game screen. It wasn't the constraint that raised him; the will to 'make something like this' came first, and the constraint functioned as the whetstone that sharpened it.

Get this order wrong, and you end up with the misunderstanding that simply imposing constraints will produce creativity. The reason Baran can call the tension with Galatasaray's identity 'the most rewarding place' is that he himself was already prepared to enjoy that tension. Constraint is a tool, not a cause.

Three questions surrounding kit design

Q. How does making kits for games differ from designing actual jerseys?
Because kit design in games isn't bound by real contracts or sponsor constraints, it lets you train purely in design logic. Real club uniforms always involve external coordination — manufacturer specifications, sponsor logo placement, colour arrangements that supporters have emotionally guarded. Games can be considered the basic training you go through before learning those constraints.
Q. When designing a club uniform, what can you change and what mustn't you touch?
The clear answer differs from club to club, but the base colour scheme and emblem shape that have been used for years are said to be difficult to change, since they're deeply etched into supporters' memories. Conversely, sleeve designs and finer patterns tend to allow more freedom, making them easier places to introduce something new. Judging where change is possible is one measure of a designer's skill.
Q. To what extent should a designer incorporate supporters' opinions?
Supporters are the most passionate users of the uniform, and their opinions are an indispensable source for understanding what matters emotionally. On the other hand, incorporating every opinion only produces something average. What Baran demonstrated is the sense that "referencing" opinions and "following" them are different things. Taking them in as information while ultimately making the final call yourself is necessary for creation.
CONVERSATION PARTNER / A perspective from one spectator

I can't recall exactly when it was that my eyes started going to the uniform before the pitch when I stepped into a stadium. There was a period when I'd sit down thinking things like "they went bold this year" or "last year's was better" about the design that changed every season. Reading about the starting point of Baran's work reminded me once again just how much memory and emotion a design can hold.

Still, if you know that emotion is woven into a uniform, you can also imagine the weight carried by the person changing it. Which part of supporters' memory does it touch, and where is it allowed to change? When you picture the uniform of a club you love, what scenes are stitched into it?

Related articles
NEWDIH logo
NEWDIH / Perspectives & Methods
Back to blog
Back to home