Starting with your form intersections, by and large you did well and are demonstrating a well developing understanding of these spatial relationships between your forms, though I did notice a couple little hiccups, which I've marked out here. For the cone/pyramid intersection on the left, I can see that you went for a curve there, because cones have curved surfaces - but the curving surface of the cone wasn't actually relevant to the parts that were visibly intersecting. It was really only the base of the cone, and two of the surfaces of the pyramid - all of which are flat. For the sphere/cone towards the upper middle, you just had the wrong direction on the curve. This explanation, which goes into breaking the sphere into specific cross-sectional slices, defined by the orientation of the surface we're intersecting with (in this case, the base of the cone) should help - although based on the rest of your intersections, I expect you already largely understand this. Mistakes happen, after all, even when we more or less know what we're doing.

Continuing onto your object constructions, overall you've done a fantastic job, despite how difficult it was. There are always things that will be extremely challenging, but what matters is that you tackle them one step at a time, with patience, and with consideration for the instructions, and you've done that quite effectively. You didn't panic, you didn't resort to any arbitrary marks or randomness, and most importantly, you were extremely thorough in your constructions in a way that speaks to the heart of this lesson, which focuses on the concept of 'precision'.

Precision is often conflated with accuracy, but they're actually two different things (at least insofar as I use the terms here). Where accuracy speaks to how close you were to executing the mark you intended to, precision actually has nothing to do with putting the mark down on the page. It's about the steps you take beforehand to declare those intentions.

So for example, if we look at the ghosting method, when going through the planning phase of a straight line, we can place a start/end point down. This increases the precision of our drawing, by declaring what we intend to do. From there the mark may miss those points, or it may nail them, it may overshoot, or whatever else - but prior to any of that, we have declared our intent, explaining our thought process, and in so doing, ensuring that we ourselves are acting on that clearly defined intent, rather than just putting marks down and then figuring things out as we go.

In our constructions here, we build up precision primarily through the use of the subdivisions. These allow us to meaningfully study the proportions of our intended object in two dimensions with an orthographic study, then apply those same proportions to the object in three dimensions.

Now you've done all this very well, but I do have some thoughts and suggestions on how some of these challenges could have been tackled differently, to lessen some of their complexity. I can certainly see why the headphones were especially difficult. Part of that comes down to their nature (and the fact that they are fairly different from the kind of objects we explore in the lesson's demos), but there is something we could do a little differently to make them a little less harrowing.

The main thing that stands out is that the nature of the headphones is that they do not really exist in a box. I mean, they do, as all things in three dimensions do - and you certainly established that in your construction - but they fit in a series of cylinders much better, as shown here.

I by no means expect you to have made this logical leap, as it's not really covered in the instructions. As with all the lessons in this course, it's less about learning how to draw everything in the world, but more about exploring 3D space through constructional drawing exercises, and so going for other simpler objects afterwards was a good call to make. That said, if the situation calls for it, there can be benefit in some cases to swap the box out for a different primitive form.

Of course, jumping in straight with cylinders does rob of us some other tools - for example, only boxes lend themselves to the useful kind of subdivision we use heavily here. So, perhaps using cylinders like this isn't the right call - but we still don't have to put the entire object in a single box. We could just as well create a separate box for each ear-cup, and work on them more independently.

All that said, you've still done a fantastic job, and I really only have one other minor point to call out. In your microphone construction, you attempted to use some filled areas of solid black to help clarify the arrangement of forms. That's a perfectly good call to make, but the way you employed them was more akin to form shading - where we make certain surfaces dark as a whole. As you may recall, here in Lesson 2, form shading isn't really something we incorporate into our drawings for this course. Instead, try to reserve those filled black areas for cast shadows specifically. This means that each filled shape will be a new addition - something designed intentionally based on the relationship between the form casting it and the surface receiving it - rather than an existing shape in the drawing. Ultimately this will still help you provide more clarity to the construction, but in doing so you'll also provide more information on how the different forms relate to one another in 3D space.

So, that about covers it. Again - you've done extremely well here, and as long as you keep up your tendency towards patience and fastidiousness, I expect you'll continue to do just as well through the rest of the course. Lesson 7 is in a lot of ways like this one, but with vastly more complex and demanding subject matter, and thus demands even more time.

I'll go ahead and mark this lesson as complete, so keep up the great work!