Here’s another version of the same head. The idea is that the ‘face’ is basically a giant sensor (vision, infra-red, whatever) with a basic video display on it’s surface. This means that the facial image/graphics can be anything - a couple of vague examples are below - at the moment I’m thinking it’s best to keep the features quite wishy washy and unspecific.
Here’s the latest iteration (full body shot) of the PitGirl. I’ve shown her here in her clean (unpainted) form, and then two versions with paint/graphics livery: one clean and one scuffed and mucked up. C&C’s please.
I love it, but I personally think some of the previous ideas for the face looked more feminine. Of the ones you posted in March, I thought the lowest ones with the Princess Leia-ish ‘hair’ structure would be really effective. It would still give you the possibility to work with the face sensor, but something about those ‘buns’ on the sides of the head just really says ‘female’. Right now if I only saw the face, I honestly don’t know if I’d be able to tell that the robot was female. I do like the sleekness and elegance of the head though, and the fact the design is so subtle. I was just wondering if there’s room for improvement there.
I really like the chest area in the last sketch! Before it looked like she had breasts for the sake of having breasts; now it looks like the breast plate is shaped organically to make room for something necessary within. Although what that would be, I don’t know. Maybe she has a really big heart(s):).
Keep going!
imo, boobs should be more emphasized in front view if you want it to come off as distinctly female.
I know, I know, this is an O-L-D project, and should have been finished an eternity ago. But it’s one I’ve sometimes dipped back into, and I wanted to experiment with a new drawing technique on a tried-and-tested design… so I decided to tidy up some of the details of the Pitgirl robot on the previous [front view] image (mainly the chest area), and also illustrate the rear view.
Here are a load of different versions of the illustrations in different states of livery-finish.
calderwa
er… can you fix me up a date with her?
Ha ha. 
Maladie - Thanks for the C&C. Can you link to the image of which head/face you’re referring to (from one of my previous posts)?
DarkAlexF - I’ve actually revised the chest plate on this latest illustration, as I felt the previous was too plain and not ‘designed’ enough. Though I don’t think you’ll classify it as being more ‘emphasised.’ Despite this I feel that the overall proportions of the figure still give an overly ‘feminine’ feeling.
Thanks everyone for your interest and sorry for not replying to your comments sooner. And my apologies that it’s taken so long to get to this stage - too many things getting in the way unfortunately.
This is probably just a design preference, but I would slim them down even more. Make them look more feminen. I like the designs, though. The girls look a bit masculine to me. What if you give them more of an hour glass figure with visible ass and tits?
I think you miss some inches in the legs (calf)
If you remove the fact that she wears platform shoes, her calfs are fine.
But Platform shoes level a woman of course, so you need to grab everything beyond that knee and move it up a little
I am a firm believer that butt should comes in pairs, even for robots. 
Otherwise looking better with each update. I agree with Scote comments on the leg also.
Are you going to make a 3D model with the final robot? Seems a great waste if not.
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.
can you share that ref with us
Here you go. I’ve censored any bits that may offend others.
Even on your ref the legs have my proportion.
Basicly, the two parts of the leg are pretty much to same lenght all the time. Even her.
Even on your ref the legs have my proportion.
Unless I’m misunderstanding you, they look proportional to me, give or take some organic curvature at the articulation points on the model…
ya your right… is not the proportion of the legs lenght. Is the mesh itself. Too round it’s give a offset look to it… I will expose it in image format (im at the studio now)
It’s pretty one on the other your concept But she doesn’t have mollets. Maybe that’s my personal focus. Your cyber tubes mollet didn’t follow the realistic mollet curve, but it’s a concept
The butt in your robot model, compare to the reference is higher, which is why the thigh looks a little too long.
Anyway, there is a reason why butt must comes in pair, & not round other than the obvious ones, which is so we will not rock about our butt when we sit down. 
If you have use those big balls at the gym, you will know what I mean.
there is a reason why butt must comes in pair, & not round other than the obvious ones, which is so we will not rock about our butt when we sit down
True. Though ‘she’ has a slightly flattened plate on her derriere, where she would be sitting, which features a stippled/rubberised coating. That should help avoid sliding about. Though I doubt she would be doing much (if any) sitting.
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.
