Starting with your form intersections, most of your intersections are looking good, although I did catch a couple issues I wanted to call out, which I've also noted down on this page.

• Towards the right side of the page, I noticed that you skipped the intersection between the sphere and the box, and also drew the intersection between the cylinder and that same box incorrectly. The intersection line should be starting where the silhouettes meet, as the intersection itself is basically there to take a 2D relationship (the overlapping of the silhouettes) and explain it in three dimensions.

• Towards the middle-ish of the page, I noted that the intersection between your cylinder and box was incorrect. You seem to have picked the angle of your intersection line based on the orientation of the cylinder - but it's actually the flat plane of the box that determines the angle at which the cylinder is being sheared. So rather than aligning the curving intersection line with your cylinder, it should actually be coming it at more of an angle, as defined by the box's orientation.

Additionally - though this isn't related to the intersection lines themselves, I did notice that more time could have been invested in the execution of your individual lines, especially when it comes to holding to every step of the ghosting method (I noticed an absence of the little dots we use in the planning phase to mark out the start/end of the line we wish to draw), as well as in not going back over your lines automatically (which itself tends to happen when we aren't making a point of applying the ghosting method to each stroke).

Continuing onto your cylinders in boxes, your work here is looking good, and you're applying the line extensions appropriately to get the most out of the exercise.

For the simpler form intersection vehicles, you've largely done a good job. You admittedly went further than was really required for the exercise (like starting your wheels out in boxes, or laying out basic perspective lines, as the intention was very much to approach the exercise as one would approach the form intersections, just laying the forms out as one would the parts of a vehicle), but all in all you did fine. I do however want to stress that the reason the exercise is just about putting down basic primitives is because it's very easy for students to fall into the trap of looking at their constructions as though they're just grid lines and edges floating in space, that are gradually stitched together to achieve a complex object. Rather, the goal as it is throughout this course is still to keep in mind that we're dealing with individual forms, building them up one at a time, as construction itself always comes back to understanding the relationships between the forms we're building up, as they exist in 3D space.

And finally, moving onto your more detailed vehicle constructions, your work is both very well done, and simultaneously not taken quite as far as it could have been. This part is only partially on you - the course itself is in a certain amount of disarray (which the very-slow-overhaul is gradually rectifying), but for those submitting for official critique it means that the information shared in the feedback you receive ends up being extremely important. I mean, it's always important, but in this case it's where we share the gist of the information that will eventually be integrated into the material, so that paying students get what they need. The only tricky part is that it's still up to the students to go back and reflect upon that feedback, and here I think you may have fixated specifically on the instructions introduced in this course, and maybe didn't go back to the previous feedback/concepts. So in that sense, it falls on both of us.

Now, your actual drawings are looking great. You're demonstrating a very strong understanding of 3D space, and one of the reasons this is being demonstrated so clearly is because you end up building up a foundation with the 3D grid, subdivisions, etc. but once that's in place, you end up eyeballing/approximating a lot. That is to say, this course is all about introducing students to exercises that'll help you develop your spatial reasoning skills (and of course develop those spatial reasoning skills in the process), and confirming that you understand how to employ them as effectively as possible, so you can continue to do so on your own as you move forwards. Ideally what we're looking for here is not end results that look beautiful. Not specifically, anyway. That, as it does in your work, tells us that your spatial reasoning skills have developed wonderfully, but they do not tell us that you understand how to best apply the exercises going forward.

Constructional drawing is itself, an exercise. It's a spatial puzzle your brain is forced to solve.

So, while I find your results here to be very strong, I do want to ensure that you're able to push yourself to your limit when it comes to things like the information I shared with you in my critique of your Lesson 6 work - specifically relating to the way in which we make all our decisions on the orthographic plan. Not just the big decisions to block out a general structure. What I'm talking about is... painfully time consuming. Honestly as it stands you've put a good chunk of time into some of these drawings. This one for instance (at least it's one with the time written on it, anyway!) shows almost 3 hours of hard work, and that is no small thing.

In order to get through this course in general, one cannot avoid showing this kind of patience and care - but what I want to see before marking the course as a whole as complete, is really the limits of what you can do, and I believe you can push yourself much farther. I don't usually make a habit of showing other students' work, as in most cases it creates an unhealthy desire to compare and contrast the results themselves, and one's individual skills, but I have found that when it comes to emphasizing how much time can be invested, I find that sharing this work by VeeDraws to be very valuable. Not least of all because she included a little time sheet that will drop your jaw to the floor.

So, before I mark this lesson as complete, I want you to do one car construction. For this one car construction, I want you to take what you demonstrated back in Lesson 6, which was an eagerness to really dig down into the weeds with your subdivisions, identifying landmarks with as much precision as you can, and spend as much time as you find possible. Spread it out across as many sittings as you need, and show me the absolute limit of what you can achieve right now. I don't expect you to put as much time in as VeeDraws did (I mean if you can, that's great, but that's not what I'm asking for) - just to push yourself to your own limits, wherever they may be.

As a side note, remember that we generally want to reserve our filled areas of solid black for cast shadows only. You've definitely done that in a number of cases, but I do see some spots where you use solid black shapes either more as form shading or to separate your drawing out in other ways - for example, filling in the interior of the turbines here, and filling in the wheel wells here. In a lot of other places your use of solid black areas could be cast shadows, but I do want to stress that when you're drawing those shadows, you should first be defining the outline of the desired shape. This step will allow you to focus entirely on designing that shadow shape such that it defines the relationship between the form casting it, and the surface receiving it. It's the specificity of the shape that really makes the difference.

One case that is a bit of an exception - although not really - is the interior of the car. Here it's perfectly okay to fill it in with black as you have been, and the excuse we use is that the exterior of the car is casting a shadow into the interior, so completely that it's filling in those areas. While it's not exactly correct (light would still be shining through the windshield), this is a simplification we use with vehicles because it helps visually organize what we see much better. For the purposes of the course, since we can use this simple "excuse", it's acceptable here as well.

So! One more car construction, pushing yourself to the absolute limits of what you can achieve. Don't eyeball/estimate anything - make all your decisions in your orthographic plans, and then carry them over to your 3D construction through subdivison. And of course, include your orthographic plans as well.