papel

Do note that you did not set where the VP is in the rough perspective, at best I guess it's in the middle on all 3 frames.

The rotated boxes is significantly improved compared to the original. I just recommend you avoid scribbling like that, just draw a few straight diagonal lines (i think it's called hatching) or use a normal pencil to "paint" them. This is so the back lines remain visible and with as little obstruction as possible.

The ellipses look decent, going off a bit more often than failing to touch all four borders, though the majority doesn't have the second or third pass.

I also took a quick glance at your 250 box submission you linked there. It doesn't look like you understood what was asked of you and you just rushed to complete it, similar to your first attempt at the rough perspective.

Hello, I hope you enjoy our time with Draw a Box and the community. The main problem with digital is that it's hard to know up to what point the software helped or hindered you, whether you CTRL+Z until you were satisfied with the result, but it's good that you're aware of that. Once you reach lesson 2, I hope you can do it on a fineliner on paper :)

At a glance, it does look like the software did help you quite a bit, so I won't make any remarks about that from now on. Higher resolution images would also be more helpful, 2000x1400 would've been better to really look into the details and to emulate a common paper proportion.

Lines: The fraying on the superimposed lines is nearly nonexistent, which is good. You could've used different lengths for the lines, their variation is almost nil.

On the ghosted lines, the lines themselves look good, often hitting the spot and in a few cases overshooting a bit, which isn't too bad. Again, there is very little variation in their length. It's possible to note some sort of wobble in a few lines as well, but those are rare.

For the ghosted planes, you forgot the + cross on them. The line quality here is good and there is no under or overshooting. Like in the other two exercises, you could have varied more on the sizes and also the angles. There's also plenty of empty space, but as it's digital, it's less of a worry.

Ellipses: On the table, the ellipses are very well done, properly contained and with the second and third passes being very close to the first one. My recommendation is to always aim to close the initial point, so there's no "open wire", so to speak.

On the planes, the ellipses touch all four edges on the majority of cases, which is good. There are very few where it fails by a bit, so it's no big deal.

On the funnels the ellipses are also well done, obeying the limit of the arc on most occasions. The problem here is that the center line isn't always properly centered, like in the bottom left one, so the first and last ellipses are cut differently.

Perspective: The plotted perspective is easy and you got it right. You did a good job on the rough perspective, with most lines being straight. Even if you didn't get the convergences to reach the VP, you came close to it on most occasions. My only complaint here would be, again, lack of variation.

On the rotated boxes you did an excellent job on the front faces, the rotation is well done. The back faces aren't always properly aligned with the front ones, but that's something you'll learn properly on the 250 box challenge.

The organic perspective looks well done, the boxes properly shrink as they go further away following the line for the most part. The bottom of the first page and the middle of the second are where it seems like there are some boxes that are the same size. There was no need to draw the back lines and complete the boxes, but there's no problem doing that.

Hello, I hope you enjoy your time doing the future exercises and continue all the way to lesson 7!

Lines: Your exercise on the superimposed lines is very uncanny in that there is almost no fraying at all. I do wonder if you really have that big control or if you applied so much pressure on the first pass that it was easier for subsequent ones to follow. Some lines don't look like they received all 8 passes, please clarify if I'm right or wrong thinking this. You could've used the available space on the first page better, but on the whole it's good.

On the ghosted lines, there is more overshooting than undershooting, which is good. The general quality of the lines here is also good.

On the ghosted planes, your lines falter. It's easy to notice wobble and suspect that your hand wasn't steady and/or that it went slower than it should.

Ellipses: For the tables, there was little variation in the "fatness" of the ellipses or their angle (slanted left or right, for instance). However, they are well contained within the boundaries and properly touch the upper and lower lines most of the time. Also, the second and third passes don't stray too much from the original line, which is also good. I do recommend you aim for closing the initial point, so as to not make the ellipse look like an open keyring, so to speak.

On the ellipses on funnels, again there's little variation in their roundness. However, they are well contained within the arcs and fit together well. Most of the central lines are also properly placed, so it cuts the ellipses in half the right way.

You either forgot to do the Ellipses on Planes exercise or you forgot to upload it.

Perspective: The plotted perspective looks good, that's an easy exercise.

The rough perspective, on the other hand, it looks like you just drew the boxes and then drew the lines towards the vanishing point, which is not what the exercise asks you to do. It tells you to:

1. Draw the front face as a rectangle

2. Plot the edges that will converge at the VP

3. Draw the converging edges

4. Draw the back face

5. Use a ruler + a different colored pen (or any pencil) to check where the convergences actually lead to.

6. For reference, this is how your exercise will look like in the end

The rotated boxes, it looks like you didn't even pay attention to what was asked of you. Why did you make so many boxes on the right side? The rightmost line of boxes do look like they're rotating, but it's all messy and many boxes are incomplete. The best way to visualize what you are supposed to do is: imagine a sphere with a lot of boxes glued to its surface. That's how the rotation works here. And this is how the end result should look like. It's not expected of you to do it perfectly, but it is expected of you to understand the concept and what the exercise asks of you.

For the organic perspective, however, you did understand the concept and did a decent job, even if your linework isn't ideal. There was no need for you to draw the organic line with a thicker pen. There were some cases where it's visible that the boxes grew again before properly shrinking towards the end of the line.

Hi Karling, I hope you enjoy your learning here. If you ever need a more immediate help or critique, you can always ask on discord, people tend to reply fast there.

Lines: The fraying on the longer lines is much more apparent than on the shorter ones. Overall, still good. The ghosted lines look clean and straight, one or two have a bit of a curve. They undershoot more often than overshoot, though, which can be problematic. As the exercise describes, it's better to go off forward than not closing the points.

This also shows on your ghosted planes. While the lines are overall good, it's easy to notice where you undershot, where the plane isn't properly closed.

Ellipses: On the tables, they look good overall, with a few frames where you didn't make good use of the available space. A few fail to touch both upper and lower boundaries, but they're not many. One thing to keep in mind when doing the second pass, aim for closing the opening point, so it really becomes a closed ellipse.

On the funnels, they look good, properly enclosed within both arcs and having the middle line properly going through their centers.

Within the ghosted planes, the ellipses are well contained in the majority of cases, touching all four edges or coming very close to it. Since they are larger here, it also shows that the second and third passes weren't as good. The ones on page 5 look better than on page 4, even bits of practice leads to better results.

Perspective: The plotted perspective looks good. On the rough perspective, some of your boxes' edges are slanted, inclined, which makes it look like you didn't have as much care with them as you did with the ghosted planes. The convergences don't always get close, but you understood the principle, which is the most important aspect here.

The first noticeable problem with your rotated boxes is that you drew over some lines and they end up looking scratched. That makes it hard, if not impossible, to tell how good your initial line was. In that regard, the first attempt was better than the second. As for the rotation itself, it looks more like a diamond than a sphere. Angles here are everything. For instance, you drew a rectangle instead of a trapeze for the box to the right of the center one. The two boxes above this one, the vertical edges look almost identical. On the left boxes, these vertical edges are more properly aligned to their implied rotation, but the horizontal ones are not.

• Keep in mind, a lot of the stuff we're asked to do on DaB is beyond our skill on purpose. I think this is important to keep in mind, we're not expected to nail exercises, we're supposed to understand principles and take the first step into ingraining them in our minds.

On the organic perspective, it's visible in the two last frames of the first page that you shrank a box in the middle too much and had to grow the next one. There are some boxes that have an extra line and red marks over, what happened there? If I had to guess, you drew the black line there and later realized it wouldn't make a good box, was that it? Another thing that stands out here is that many boxes' edges have a second or even third line drawn over. If the pen was failing, it would be better to just get one that wasn't. If it was the case of "this line came out wrong", you're not supposed to fix it in these exercises.

My main recommendation, above all, is for you to stop drawing over "bad" lines to "fix" them.

Sorry for replying somewhat late, been away from the site a bit! Do feel free to give me an @ over Discord and I'll get back asap.

1- Yes. Ghosting and no ruler aid, except for checking the convergences once you've drawn the boxes. The challenge suggests using the Y method, where you draw the vertex nearest to the viewer and the three edges that represent each axis and point towards their respectives vanishing points. If you come up with a different method of drawing boxes, feel free to try it.

2- Yes, though ideally, you'll want to make them all with 3 points perspective.

3- While not required, it is a good thing to do, as it helps you track your boxes and a future reviewer to call out any details on specific boxes.

4- Yes, but only after you've drawn all boxes in a page. How many you draw per page is up to you, but 4 to 6 is ideal, as it should leave enough room to check all three convergences.

For that extra question, there's no need to add another page in case the convergence is off the paper. In fact, you don't need to extend the lines until they converge even within the paper, as in some cases they might get too long.

Half a month later, critique time! Also, if things take a while, like 1 week+, you can try and check on discord if anyone can take a look on your stuff.

That pen you used has very light lines, barely stronger than your pencil. See if you can get a fineliner in the near future. Anyway, on with the critique.

Lines: There is significant fraying on your lines and some of it happens right after the start, even on the shorter lines.

The ghosted lines could've used more variation in length. You often get very close to the end point, which is good, but in some cases you missed the starting spot, too, which is not good.

A significant portion of your ghosted planes aren't properly closed, the lines don't reach the end point. It's better to overshoot, go over the point, than to not reach it. There is visible wobble in some lines and curving/arcing in others, but the lines look good for the most part, even if they don't reach the end point.

Ellipses: The table looks ok, but many ellipses visibly had more than 3 passes. The main problem here is with the subsequent passes straying from the previous one. The good is that they're mostly well contained within the borders.

The ellipses on planes is 50/50, half with significant straying, the second and third passes very off from one another; the other half with more controlled passes. In all cases, you manage to get most, if not all, borders touched, which is good.

On the funnels, they're properly cut in half by the middle line most of the time. Their sizes is a bit inconsistent and the straying from consecutive passes is visible.

Perspective: The plotted perspective was supposed to be 3 frames, but you got that one right so I don't think you'll need to make the rest of it.

The rough perspective is good, you understood the theory and some boxes came very close to converging at the VP, even if others didn't so well. The main problem here are the lines of the boxes, with many visibly wobbly, arcing or failing to reach the end point. There were also some cases of scratching, drawing over lines, avoid that.

The front faces of the rotated boxes is very close to being right, but the back faces break the rotation, this is very visible in the 3 middle horizontal lines, the back faces almost look like parallels.

Your organic perspective looks very good, most of the boxes correctly get smaller as they follow the line. The problem, like before, is that your lines often don't end up straight.

Lines: Your superimposed lines are good and you make great use of the available space there. While on the second page there is more visible fraying, it's mostly due to there being many page wide lines. You curved lines also have low relative fraying, which is good.

Your ghosted lines get very close to the end point, which is good. The problem here is that there is visible wobbling or curving in some lines.

The ghosted planes look better in regards to line quality. The extremes, while interesting to try, are more prone to errors, although your lines there tended to be very straight and on spot.

Ellipses: The table of ellipses looks good, with most of them properly contained within the frames. There are cases where the second or third pass stray more from the original, this is more noticeable on the larger ellipses.

On the planes, it's very hard to tell how the more extreme ones went. There are some ellipses with more than 3 passes as well. Other than that, most of them are well contained and manage to touch all four borders, or come very close to it, which is very good.

For the funnels, the middle line not being properly aligned makes it impossible to get all ellipses properly cut in half, but most of them are properly contained. The ones on the corners are better in that regard, as it's easier to make sure the line comes off in the center than between the curves.

Perspective: The plotted perspective is easy stuff and yours is good. Your rough perspective is very good, with lines converging close to the VP and the boxes themselves being clean for the most part. There are some where the back face is a trapeze rather than a rectangle.

Your rotated boxes are great, with the only problems being a bit of placement, as the diagonals don't give it a "round" look, and some back faces. Considering the difficulty of this exercise, you did really well there.

On the organic perspective, your lines suffered a bit and look like the ghosted lines exercise. There is significant improvement comparing the first frame to the second of the first page, although there were spots were it looked like the boxes weren't getting farther away. Overall, the exercise looks good.

Man, the line of lesson 1 homework needing critique never ends! Better late than never, hopefully!

Lines: The superimposed lines had a very poor use of the available space, mainly on the second page. You could've tried one or two lines that went the whole extension of the page, but it's fine. The straight lines don't fray too much, which is good. The curved ones are trickier to avoid fraying, but what you did there is good, too.

On the ghosted lines, they look very good, missing the end point by very little. You could've tried more variation on the lengths, but it's good.

The ghosted planes, much like your ghosted lines, are very clean and get the points right nearly every time, which is great. Like the ghosted lines, you could've experimented with more angle variation, like those shown on the exercise page's "it should end up like this". There are a few places where the pen failure is noticeable and a few lines with a very slight curve, but those are negligible.

Ellipses: Your table of ellipses looks good, you make good use of the space, though in some places the ellipses don't touch both upper and lower borders and there were parts where you varied their shape instead of just their size.

For the ghosted planes, although some failed to touch all four borders, the ellipses are well contained and the second and third passes don't stray too much from the original, which is very good.

On the funnels, looks like you had trouble with setting the middle line on 5 of them. What happened? As for the ellipses, they are well contained and, where you got the middle line right, they are often aligned properly with it.

One tip for future ellipses of yours, me mindful of not leaving loose ends, try and close them.

Perspective: You should've separated the page of the plotted perspective in 3 frames, although the exercise is easy and you got it right, there.

I can see you had some initial trouble with the rough perspective, the first and second frames of the first page really show it, especially on the leftmost box, with those scratched lines. Your second page was a much better job. Still, looks like your line accuracy suffered, especially compared to your ghosted planes. Something to keep in mind in the future, when there's only 1 vanishing point, two faces will be perfectly parallel.

The rotated boxes are almost on the right track. You should've left more space between the boxes and avoided drawing over some lines a second or third time, even if the first one was "wrong". The rotation itself is hard to assess because the boxes vary a lot in their respective dimensions. What I mean is, if you could compare the upper right and upper left boxes side to side, they would be different. The first diagonals are also different from one another. I said you are almost on the right track because the angle difference is almost right on many places, but the faces aren't well aligned. Sometimes I think this exercise would be easier if it told the people to start from the back faces, but I digress.

On the organic perspective, your lines are mostly good and clean again, this is what you want to do. On some frames, the second to last box is larger than the previous one, but otherwise the "farther away" look is good.

The scratching is you drawing over a line, i should probably have clarified this earlier.

Think back to the first exercise, the superimposed lines. A lot of your scratching is due to you doing the same thing, drawing over a second time, where you should not. For every exercise, you draw a line and that's it, no drawing over it, no "fixing" it.

Here's what I mean. Red = scratching, Green = correct lines

https://i.ibb.co/SNpMj2r/example.png

The exercises are all dated from October 2019. Did you give up back then and decided to come back? Genuinely curious as to what happened.

Lines: They look good for the most part. There was little variation on the ghosted lines, you could've tried much longer and shorter lines. There is some curving and arcing on the ghosted planes and sometimes they undershoot, which can be more troublesome than overshooting, depending on the circumstances.

Ellipses: Most of them are decent, though you'll want to try and close them properly, not leave the points hanging in the air. This is valid for all 3 exercises, but more noticeable on the table of ellipses, where the second pass also often strays too much from the first. The center line in most funnels isn't well aligned with the borders, it's often slanted, so it's hard to tell if your ellipses would've been "cut" in half. The good is that you managed to get most of them well contained within the arced borders.

For the ellipses on planes, the main problem is the second pass getting way off mark from the first, but you usually manage to maintain most of the ellipse within the borders, which is good.

Perspective: Some of your lines on the rough perspective are not ideal, with some arcing or curvature. The important thing is that you understood the principle, even if some edges went way off point, others got really close to VP.

The rotated boxes look very good, the edge looks curved, the only problem are some lines that you tried to fix. That's the problem with "fixing" lines, they really stand out.

On the organic perspective, the first page doesn't seem to follow the "farther away" thing, mainly on the first 2 frames, as the last boxes are larger than the ones in the middle. You probably realized this, as your second page got the boxes properly shrinking, save for a few along the middle.