I'm glad to hear that this course has made a meaningful difference in your life - often we do meet close friends when we're all suffering under the same kind of torture.

So! Let's jump right in. Starting with your form intersections, you're doing a pretty solid job here with constructing forms that feel solid and believable, as well as defining the specific way in which they all relate to one another within that 3D space. I'm not seeing any intersections that stand out as being incorrect - you're showing that you're clearly thinking about the manner in which each surface curves through space, which is helping you to tackle even especially difficult ones well.

You do still have plenty of room to improve with your larger freehand ellipses, to be sure, but that's pretty normal at this stage. Just be sure to keep up with that practice, and try to push yourself more towards larger ones more often.

Continuing onto your cylinders in boxes, you're generally doing similarly well, with a couple of little things to call out:

  • I noticed that one of the ellipses in the left-most boxed cylinder wasn't touching all four edges of its specific plane. This issue only came up once in your work, so it's likely just a little slip-up. Still, it is a common sort of mistake I see from some students, so I wanted to call your attention to it anyway. Always ensure the ellipses touch all four edges, otherwise their line extensions don't end up being too useful to us when doing our error analysis.

  • I did notice a bit of a tendency of trying to keep some of your sets of lines - especially those that run down the length of the cylinder - much more perpendicular on the page. Remember that we cannot completely eliminate our convergences at a whim - the vanishing point only goes to infinity when the set of lines itself runs perpendicular to the viewer's angle of sight. Basically, if they're slanting towards or away from the viewer through the depth of the scene, there has to be a concrete VP. What we control is the orientation of the form we draw - not whether that orientation will require a concrete vanishing point.

Continuing forward, I think you've done a pretty great job throughout this lesson. While your work here isn't necessarily the best I've seen, you've done an excellent job of demonstrating the patience and care with which you've both analyzed each vehicle, and with which you've pinned down as much specific spatial information as you could when actually constructing them in 3D space. You've shown considerable discipline here, and have allowed each drawing to take as long as it needed, rather than rushing things based on your own schedule or timeline.

I think your core understanding of the principles from the lesson - of employing the ellipse technique to reflect measurements into different dimensions and build out 3D grids to scale, of breaking your forms down through subdivision and repeating specific measurements through space, and most of all, of working from the information available to you on the page rather than relying strictly on far-off vanishing points, is shown best in the earlier drawings where we focus on building the basic structures up. It's certainly present in your later drawings too, but being able to see the simpler structures - or at least, the relatively simpler ones, as they still look like they took a damn lot of time - is simply easier due to the focus on core, solid structures.

I certainly won't say that there weren't mistakes - there are definitely cases where your proportions are indeed off. This is totally normal however, and what's more important to me is that despite the proportions veering off from what you'd expected, you still adhered very closely and tightly to the specific structure and scaffolding in place. You didn't make large logical leaps, or attempt to go out of your way to correct things that were already set in stone. As a result, your constructions still came out feeling solid and 3D - rather like the vehicle you were drawing was itself disproportionate, and you were just capturing it faithfully. That's one of the things I love most about teaching construction - the reference image is at the end of the day, just a source of information. Information is important, because it helps us make choices that lean more into making the things we draw believable and tangible, but they aren't a hill to die on. Sometimes we slip up - and sometimes we intentionally exaggerate certain proportions to convey not just what is physically, literally present - but rather to capture the impression we're given as the witness and observer.

Jumping further down into your cars towards the end - which are no doubt the most challenging topic to tackle throughout this entire course, I could definitely see you trying to figure out a way to approach both the structural solidity of each vehicle, but also the smooth, fluid nature of each car's own design. In your attempt at the shelby mustang, I can definitely see where leaning in more swooping curves and bold choices did cause some trouble towards the back of the car, but it wasn't a bad call. Boldness leaves us vulnerable to mistakes, but it also really helped you capture an interesting impression along the front of the car. Not perfect, but that boldness was a good route to take.

Your next attempt (you labelled it the mustang demo, but I'm thinking this one's probably the camaro) definitely showed clear improvement. You were still bold and confident, but you did pull yourself back a little bit, and perhaps relied more on straight cuts and boxier forms for longer, giving yourself a stronger base upon which to build. I definitely felt this one came out really nicely - although you would have been even better off had you taken more advantage of the space available to you on the page - but these are the sort of things that are sometimes more obvious in retrospect.

Applying the things you'd learned on those two car demos definitely played out pretty well on your Toyota Supra MK4. While it's again not a perfect execution and has its flaws, what I'm looking for - a regimented manner of thinking, of how you consider jumping from one stage of construction to the next, and how you lay out adequate information to keep pushing forward - is coming along really well. Again, though, like the camaro I do think this one ended up a little cramped and tight. As you pushed further back in space, this would have resulted in less space to think through certain problems, resulting in some more clumsiness. Always try to draw as big as you can, it will help a lot.

As a side note - I did notice that you worked with fineliners here. That was certainly a choice you were welcome to make, although you may find that working in ballpoint may also make this lesson somewhat less... painful. Still tedious, still time consuming, but they are a touch more forgiving to be sure.

Anyway! As a whole I'm very pleased with the way you've progressed through this lesson, and through this course as a whole. So, I am proud to announce that you may consider this lesson, and the drawabox course, complete. Congratulations! I wish you the best of luck as you continue leveraging what you've learned here.