architectus - This is an area of the design I went back and forth with for a while. When I started playing with this robot design I hadn’t really done any humanoid-type figures before, so I was experimenting a lot. I eventually decided to try and make her look obviously ‘female’ but not too ‘Playboy’ - after all, the original intention was that she is a mechanic (ie, serving a functional purpose, rather than just looking feminine). So I decided, along with feedback from members of another CG forum, that she should have the obvious feminine attributes - hips, smaller waist, thinner arms, some kind of form for breasts/chest, and an overall smooth, sleek styling approach (ie not angular, chunky), but not being too cliche’d with the obvious go-to areas. Yes, she could be even more feminine, but I wanted her to appear that she was also a functional robot; arms/legs that are too thin, and a big chest and arse would push her into a zone I didn’t want to go. You can see some of the more masculine and feminine doodles I played with in developing her design on my website: www.jamiemartindesign.co.uk/#pitgirl .
Scote - Slightly related to the above post, I didn’t want to make her too ‘model-like’ , but wanted to retain a feeling of functionality as well. It was a balancing game. And the illustrations were based directly on the proportions of a model in that pose (with high-heels on), so they are anatomically correct, but yes, they could have gone even more ‘leggy’ perhaps. 
PKD - I considered the bum being two cheeks, but, as mentioned above, was walking a fine line between trying to make her functional looking and feminine, without veering too much into the ‘tins n arse’ look. Regarding modelling her in 3D, I’m not sure. I’m a bit sick of this design by now. But if you feel it might still be worthwhile, I may consider it? I’m a bit blind as to if this design is worth it or not.
Thanks for looking.
