Download

Female mannequin skeletal mesh

https://www.unrealengine.com/marketplace/female-mannequin << this? Sorry, I don’t find it feminine at all.

It’s not laziness. It’s severe lack of dev time. Not all of us have luxury to be full time indies.

P.S. If someone makes good model and put it on the Marketplace - I’ll be the first buying it. The issue is that no one has so far and Epic is known to do really good job on everything :wink:

Hey Motorsep,

This has been brought up before and comes down to being a request for a new animation set and model. The character model is meant to only be there very temporarily and be replaced with your own character, so it wasn’t meant to affect development. It may happen one day that Epic does pursue creating a new default mesh, but as of right now there are no plans that I’m aware of. If this is something that the community seems to need to help with development, we’re open to hearing feedback.

Please check out the following character packs for female models if you require a replacement now. The mixamo pack is free and can easily be just brought into a newer project:

[MENTION=8]Alexander Paschall[/MENTION]

The point is that there is already a Mannequin. A high quality rigged character that can be used in production for a certain type of games. My game happens to accommodate Mannequin. I would be nice to have a partner for it, a female partner that is.

I sure could use some of those models as they are indeed of a high quality. However, they don’t fit into my project stylistically and would force me to go AAA-indie production route which will probably either kill the project or I will be releasing it when UE 5.25 is about to be released :rolleyes:

If there are no plans, then please lock this thread.

Even the $10 prototype pack? If we did a female mesh, it wouldn’t be very far off from that one stylistically so I am not sure Epic releasing one would help in that specific instance. I want to keep the thread open because I want the feedback about the models and animations.

Well, not to offend the author(s) of that product, but IMO Epic’s Mannequin looks better. I might give it a spin anyway and see if it looks well in cel shaded material with inked outlines.

OK I’ll give it a go. :wink:

Since the beginning of time, well at least since the invention of the video game, there has always been the gap between the needs of code and content, left versus right brain thinking, where code is all about ones and zeros smashing into each other where content, player animation creation, is a visual process of being able to see the process change over time as to iteration and inspired creation.

That’s to say that code has to work today based on a purpose that is general by nature where content can take days or even months based on the perspective of the artists who see the would based on some form of reference as to the result they are looking for. It’s the only option unless you can see into my brain which is a scary place to be.

In the case of animation the devil is in the detail of function following form so using a male form to create female animations the result usually lands up with your female character looking more like a drag queen rather than a female by design. It’s just human nature to work with what you see and female movement on a male figure just looks goofy. It simply does not or will it ever look right unless of course your character is a drag queen. :wink:

To me it’s not a problem, I’m a big boy and can afford the toys I need, but lets not forget the 12-14 year old who can not afford to buy food yet alone off the shelf art assets.

A bit of a rant, from an artist perspective, but hay if it does not “matter” than the end result will be the mess that is Mass Effect. :wink:

@FrankieV

Did I mention anything about anims? I think not.

I think I can do it by applying some morph targets on the current dummy character.
Using blend shapes only I created a children Owe character. :slight_smile:

Yes, it’s easy. For example I did this in 10 mins in Blender waiting for the stream to start: https://gfycat.com/IckyFirsthandBagworm

Hahahahah @cyaoeu Very good and hilarious

I think you should increase the chest region a bit more.
And maintain the hips in the same proportion (height) of the original model, only increasing slightly the width in relation to the chest.

As someone who has made female models for the Epic skeleton, I completely agree that there needs to be a female skeleton. There are some adjustments required that appear to be at odds with the Epic recommendations. Here’s my reasoning:

To begin, you have to understand that there are fundamental differences between making a male and female base skeletal asset. Height is the most obvious and can be easily changed through scaling, but even a male and female skeleton at the same height are proportioned differently:
005a0443a39730d56aff162524f7fd0063d35c92.jpeg

If you are using the same skeletal hierarchy for your male and female characters, the differences in shoulder - hip ratio, leg length - torso length, finger length - body size all necessitate joint translations in the bind pose for the female mesh.

Now take a look at the marketplace recommendations for using the epic skeleton:

>Do not scale the skeleton
>If you absolutely must move a joint, make sure that the joint isn’t move very far

So already the recommendations for the Epic skeleton are at odds with the biological differences between male and female skeletons.

So how does Epic expect us to approach female skeletons? Do we model a larger female then scale it down in our character viewport? What about the joint translations? When I’m adjusting the leg-torso ratio, do I increase the length of the leg joints or decrease the length of the spine joints to get the correct ratio?

Then another issue I’ve noticed is the location of the shoulders in the Epic skeleton. The joints are placed far back on the mannequin in relation to the upper leg joints. It kind of works for the mannequin because his delts and lats are huge, but on a real skeleton the hip joints align vertically with the shoulder joint when looking at a profile view.

6ccfd702072d8ceedfc277a1477ac01c8b010bcf.jpeg

So to fix this, I ended up reorienting the Epic shoulder joints to get a better alignment. But lo, this is in violation of Epic recommendations again.
>make sure the joint orientation does not change

In conclusion, there are quite a few problems with making a female mannequin that need some clarification from Epic. I would at least like to see some clarification on these issues, but as OP has stated, a simple solution is for Epic to release a female mannequin so we can see the best practices for ourselves.

Ah, this seems more like an issue of marketplace requirements for submissions. I’ll pass that along to the marketplace team and let them know it’s not feasible for female animations.

EDIT: Yep, I see all the female animation packs include their own meshes, so they can’t just submit the animations. That’s a good reason to either make exceptions or see what else we can do to fix that.

As far as how are you expected to make a female skeleton, you’ll need to watch modeling tutorials, then use our documentation for FBX importing/exporting and Character Setup. Additionally, there are free female character models that are provided already through the Mixamo animation pack where you can see how they were implemented.

Thanks for responding. I would definitely like to hear from the marketplace team on what their recommendations are for best practices for modifying the mannequin skeleton. I made an image detailing some of the issues I described in my above post. As you can see there are multiple ways to manipulate a male skeleton into a female proportion, so some idea of what the “best” way to do it to ensure maximum compatibility would be helpful.
Untitled-1.jpg

Humm well the BIG difference between the male and female form is the center of gravity is lower.

:smiley:

As human we just know what looks right and what looks wrong so the bottom center is where the center of gravity should be and where the hips should pivot from.

P.S. the legs rotation should be higher.

Here is an image difference between male and female. Male hips are rectangle where female hips are triangular so as I said if animate using the male form as female it will not look right as to rotation locations

Yes, it would be really great to have female skeleton. It’s easy to use male-based animations in your project because they share the same skeleton and mesh. There are few great animations packs, you can start your project really quick. Often you can finish prototype with Epic/marketplace animations only. And there’s no problem with using these anims in final game. This is entire purpose of marketplace, right? Provide real content for you game, not just placeholders. And that’s work well.

But if you need a lot female anims and you care about quality… there’s no 100% compatibility between packages created by different authors. And that would be awesome. Even if you end up with using your own skeleton - easier retargeting, no surprises with different skeletons. The same high standard as with male mannequin.

Not only useful for games. Also for people who would like to create badass “alive” arch viz where male/female character just doing something. And it would look more natural if female character wouldn’t be simply scaled to male body.

You invest quite a lot effort in things like Human Race (which I loved).

Why not invest a bit of time into reshaping default male skeleton into female one? :slight_smile:

Hi @Ohriginal
Have you tried skeleton retargeting using same skeleton and pose assets to modify animation sequences to fit a female format (changing pelvis bone to female center of gravity)?

And, the model you used in the example is not a real female anatomical model. It’s a base mesh for one anime character. Some proportions are very exaggerated for more and less, (head++, eyes++, nose–, mouth–, pelvis++, clavicle–, chest–, breasts–, arms–, legs++, hands–,… etc).

Hi. I’ll take a look again, but it was my initial understanding that skeleton retargetting is for different skeletal assets with different joint hierarchies.

Hi Guys,
Jumping into this old discussion, but a female mannequin with anatomically correct proportion from Epic would definitely be a good addition.
There is a lot of Unreal marketplace vendors who make animations for the male mannequin. This is a standard, and allow to buy and paste these animation directly into your game.
I know there is a quite good female mannequin from a 3rd party vendor, but as long as it is not at least Epic labeled, it won’t be a standard. that’s why we need it.

Not every studios or indie has AAA budget to make everything from scratch.