AIMoCap
AIMoCap

CUSTOM AVATAR

Custom avatar retargeting for video mocap

Upload, bind, test, and publish custom avatars in AIMoCap so video mocap jobs can reuse them as output targets.

For animation teams looking for custom character retargeting in a video mocap workflow.

Short answer

AIMoCap lets teams upload, bind, retarget-test, publish, and reuse custom avatars as Studio output targets.

When to use AIMoCap

Use it when repeated mocap jobs should target your own character instead of only a default animation target.

When not to use AIMoCap

Do not skip binding and retarget testing; source asset quality and skeleton structure still determine whether the avatar is reusable.

AIMoCap includes a custom avatar workflow for teams that need motion output on their own character rather than only a default target.

After upload, A-pose editing, binding, retarget testing, and publish, a custom avatar can be reused inside Studio.

This page is about the reusable target lifecycle, not only file upload. The important decision is whether the character has passed enough setup and test steps to become safe for repeated mocap jobs.

The practical value is repeatability. A custom avatar should have a known source asset, binding decision, test clip result, publish state, and limitations before teams use it across many mocap jobs.

What this enables

  • Published custom avatars become reusable Studio output targets.
  • Retarget testing is required before a custom avatar is used as a reliable target.
  • The custom avatar workflow is separate from Unitree G1 robot motion output.
  • A-pose editing and skeleton binding are setup steps; they do not by themselves prove the character is ready for production mocap jobs.
  • Publishing is the handoff point where a tested avatar becomes selectable for future Studio work.
  • When a custom avatar result looks wrong, debug source asset quality, A-pose, skeleton binding, scale, root orientation, and source-video readability separately.
  • A published avatar reduces repeated setup, but each new source video still needs result review.
  • Custom avatar quality should be judged on the receiving character, not only on a generic preview or default skeleton.
  • A useful custom-avatar record includes source FBX, A-pose decision, binding result, retarget test clip, publish state, and known cleanup limits.
  • If a character has stylized proportions, acceptance testing should include the motions most likely to expose scale, shoulder, hip, hand, or foot-contact issues.

Custom avatar retargeting decision matrix

Custom avatar retargeting is most useful after the avatar has passed setup checks; the decision is whether the character is ready to become a reusable target.

You have a production character that should receive repeated mocap jobs
Upload, A-pose, bind, test, and publish the avatar before selecting it as a Studio target.
A published avatar saves repeated setup, but each new source video still needs result review for pose fit, scale, and contact quality.
The avatar uploads but the retarget test looks wrong
Debug the avatar setup before using it in mocap jobs: check source FBX quality, skeleton mapping, A-pose, scale, and root orientation.
Bad avatar setup and bad source video can look similar in the final result; isolate them with retarget tests before production runs.
You only need a quick animation proof without a specific character
Use the Default target first, then move to custom avatar setup once the motion direction is worth reusing.
Custom avatar setup adds value when the same character will be reused; it is unnecessary overhead for a one-off motion check.
The avatar is stylized or has unusual proportions
Run acceptance clips that stress shoulders, hips, hands, foot contact, and turns before publishing it as a reusable target.
A character that passes a simple idle/walk test but breaks on the motions the team actually needs.

Character pipeline objections

Character artists and technical animators usually ask what happens after upload: pose assumptions, skeleton mapping, retarget test quality, and whether the target is reusable.

Upload is not the whole workflow

A common objection is that a model can upload successfully but still fail as a production target, so binding and retarget tests need to stay central.

Pose and skeleton details are practical blockers

A-pose mismatch, unusual hierarchy, scale, and limb mapping can affect whether a custom avatar is useful, even when the source video is readable.

Reusable targets are the business value

The strongest workflow benefit is not one-off retargeting, but preparing a character once and reusing it across future mocap jobs.

Custom-avatar workflow facts

Use these facts to decide whether this workflow matches your output, integration, and cleanup needs.

Reusable target

A published avatar can be selected again in Studio, which makes the upfront binding and test step useful for repeated jobs.

Quality gate

A retarget test acts as the practical quality gate before an uploaded character becomes a reusable mocap target.

Separate from robot targets

Custom avatars are animation-character targets; Unitree G1 remains a separate robot-motion target.

Lifecycle boundary

A draft avatar can contain source assets and mapping work, while a published avatar is the version intended for repeated Studio job selection.

Search-intent boundary

Users searching for custom avatar retargeting usually need upload, A-pose, binding, test, publish, and reuse details, not only a generic video mocap pitch.

Debugging separation

A custom-avatar page is more useful when it separates avatar setup failures from source-video failures, because both can produce poor motion on the final character.

Target-specific acceptance

A reusable avatar target should be accepted or rejected based on playback on that character, not only on default preview quality.

Known-limit record

Recording limitations makes future jobs easier to review because teams know which issues are avatar setup, source-video quality, or expected cleanup.

Custom avatar workflow

01

Upload the character

Start by creating a character profile and uploading the source FBX asset.

02

Bind and test

Edit the A-pose when needed, map the skeleton, and run a retarget test before publishing.

03

Publish and reuse

Once the retarget result is approved, publish the avatar so it can be selected for future mocap jobs.

04

Keep draft and published states separate

Treat uploaded or partially bound characters as draft assets until the retarget test proves the target is ready for reuse.

05

Document target limitations

After publishing, record known limitations such as hand reach, shoulder twist, foot contact, scale, or source-video types that require cleanup.

Common questions

Can I use my own character in AIMoCap?

Yes. A custom avatar can be uploaded, bound, tested, published, and then reused as an output target.

Why is a retarget test needed?

The retarget test helps confirm that the skeleton mapping and motion result are usable before the avatar becomes a reusable target.

Can custom avatars be used with video mocap jobs?

Yes. Published custom avatars can be selected as output targets in Studio.

Is uploading an FBX enough to make a reusable target?

No. Upload is only the first step. The avatar still needs A-pose review, skeleton binding, and a retarget test before it should be published for reuse.

What is the difference between draft and published avatars?

A draft avatar is still being prepared or tested. A published avatar has passed the workflow and can be selected again as a Studio output target.

When should I avoid publishing a custom avatar?

Do not publish it if the retarget test fails on the motions you expect to reuse, or if scale, A-pose, skeleton mapping, hand reach, or foot contact still need setup work.

What should I debug when custom avatar motion looks wrong?

Check the source FBX, A-pose, skeleton binding, scale, root orientation, left/right mapping, retarget test result, and whether the source video is readable enough for the intended motion.

Sources reviewed

These related AIMoCap resources document the workflow boundaries, output formats, and implementation details referenced on this page.