Starting with your form intersections, though we introduce this exercise back in Lesson 2, it's really one that captures the core focus of this course as a whole. And so, we expect it to improve steadily over the whole length of the course, especially as students explore the constructional material from Lessons 3-7. That is to say, we don't expect perfect work by any measure, but it's at this point where we assign the exercise again in Lesson 6 that students are generally in a better position to benefit from more specific critique. We also find that at this stage it's normal for students to be fairly comfortable with intersections involving straight edges, while still having some issues with those involving curving surfaces. I'd say you're a little further along than that, but there are some issues I'm noticing with the intersections that involve curved surfaces, so there is still some room to continue to grow.

Looking at your first page, I identified a number of issues - most were involving those curved surfaces, although there were a couple places where the intersections involving flat surfaces got a little overcomplicated.

In general, the most important thing when navigating intersections is to think about them not as being one intersection between two forms, but rather focusing on the specific pairs of surfaces that are intersecting with one another. An intersection may cross many different surfaces, but in any given area there's only ever going to be two. This diagram explains how we might think about this, and also demonstrates how an intersection might change when we switch out an edge (where two separate intersections meet, resulting in a sharp corner to redirect its trajectory) with a more rounded, gradual transition.

I think you do understand this already to a point, but the areas where you overcomplicated intersections suggests that you lost track of which surfaces were actually being involved, and those where your intersections with rounded surfaces were incorrect would also benefit from paying attention to the direction in which those surfaces are curved.

One last thing - the cylinder to the upper left of that page has been drawn with its side edges entirely parallel, which as explained here in the cylinder challenge is incorrect when the cylinder isn't specifically oriented in a particular fashion, but rather oriented randomly in space.

Continuing onto your object constructions, there are unfortunately a number of issues in how you chose to tackle your work here, in terms of which tools you used and how you employed them. From what I can see:

• You used a ruler for your bounding box/subdivisions/etc

• You drew completely separate, freehanded marks when actually drawing your object within that framework

• You used a ballpoint pen for your bounding box/subdivisions/etc

• You used a fineliner for your object construction

Please reread the tools section of the lesson, as well as the homework section (specifically the last paragraph). They specifically encourage students to use a ruler for all the lines for the exercises (where possible), and not to simply choose to freehand the marks. It explains that the point of allowing the use of additional tools here is not to be kind, but rather to ensure students are able to focus on what this lesson addresses. We have plenty of exercises to help with freehanding your linework, and that would of course continue to be present throughout your warmup routines. Doing so here however when it is not necessary to do so will require you to take a portion of your mental resources and use them to that end, rather than committing them all to how the lesson material itself is being applied.

Additionally, in the tools section I state that if you use a ballpoint pen, you need to be using it for all of your linework and not switching to a fineliner for a "clean-up" pass. This is unfortunately precisely what you did, so it seems you missed that instruction.

All that said, when it comes to the process employed in terms of the use of bounding boxes, subdividing them, etc. as well as the use of orthographic plans to help ensure that your decisions are made separately from their execution, you've really done quite well. The resulting constructions do suffer from the neglect of those previous constructions, but the underlying structure does show that you're still largely adhering quite well to the principles of precision laid out throughout the lesson.

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.

Overall, you've done quite well, although I did notice that for your xbox controller, you did a great job of laying out the structure in your orthographic plans, but it seems you did not make any decisions there regarding your thumbsticks and button placements. Rather, you seem to have tried to figure those out on the spot, resulting in boxes that were floating independently of the core of the construction, rather than feeling grounded within it. The only portion you did actually plot out (which we can see in the top-down orthographic) is the d-pad, which was missing from the final construction. It seems like you may have rushed a little on those points.

If you ever find yourself in a situation where you're working on the 3D construction and find that certain decisions had not been made, a good strategy is to go back to your orthographic plan and simply add those decisions there. Don't consider the orthographic plan to be sealed off - you can always add more to it, and that is precisely where your decisions should be made, rather than on the fly as you're working on the construction.

Another point I noticed was that you seemed to jump right into drawing curves directly, which suggests to me you may have missed this portion of the notes. Please be sure to review it.

The last thing I wanted to mention isn't a mistake or a missed instruction, just a suggestion on how your glasses construction could have been handled better. How you approached it is honestly how a lot of students would, so there's nothing abnormal there - but what I would recommend, given that the arms of the glasses pivot relative to one another (meaning that they wouldn't necessarily be completely open all the time, you might want to construct glasses whose arms are slightly folded), is to use a completely separate bounding box for the main body of the glasses and another for each arm. This way you can construct them with their own separate orthographic plans for each component, making each one a lot simpler, and also avoid being locked into such a rigid configuration.

Now, as a whole I am disappointed that a number of instructions were ignored, but you have demonstrated an understanding of the core purpose of the lesson. Your choices there simply interfered with how the results turned out. Please take much more care in going through the instructions in the future, as you would not want to hit the mountain of work involved in Lesson 7 (which is like Lesosn 6 but considerably more complex and work-intensive) only to find that you neglected things that were laid out clearly. If it happens there, it could result in a revision, as I am not inclined to mark the whole course as complete when a student has demonstrated a pattern of neglecting their own responsibilities as they go through the material.

It always helps to reflect on why such things occur - perhaps you went through the instructions, then ended up away from the material for a while. In such cases, don't jump right into the work assuming you know what it all entails - review the instructions. Or perhaps certain things slipped your mind - while reviewing the material frequently can be tedious, it's not a bad idea, but it can be mitigated somewhat by taking your own summarized notes and reviewing those more frequently, while returning to the original instructions less frequently.

Anyway, I'll go ahead and mark this lesson as complete.