Jumping right in with your form intersections, your work here is coming along quite well. At this point I don't expect students to be able to do the exercise perfectly (and there are some issues that I'll point out with your work as well), but generally speaking it's common for students to be fairly comfortable with intersections between different flat surfaces, as well as having increasing confidence (with some issues) with intersections involving both flat and rounded surfaces. Rounded-on-rounded intersections are still a potential source of difficulty, in most cases.

Your work shows that you're certainly at that point, and perhaps a little further along - I can see signs that you are getting your head around rounded-on-rounded intersections as well, though still with some concerns. I've laid out the main issues I saw here. Most notably are the cases where along one side of a round/round intersection you lose track of how that last bit follows the forms' surfaces. We can help address this by focusing on the direction of curvature of the relevant surfaces. This diagram helps to demonstrate this concept further. Also, note how as soon as our intersection hits a sharp edge and passes into a surface with a totally different orientation, that intersection line has to change its trajectory, resulting in a sharp corner. I noticed that you missed this for the box-cylinder intersection towards the bottom, when it transitioned into the top face of the box. My correction includes the sharp corners.

As an extension of this - that is, paying attention to the individual directions of curvature of a given surface - it's important to keep in mind that a single surface may curve in one direction, but be straight/flat in the other. For example, a cylinder is curved around its girth, but straight/flat along its length. Thus, that intersection with the box in the upper middle of the page will have a more dramatic curve for the upper plane of the box, but the side plane intersects with it in a direction that aligns more to the length of the cylinder, resulting in a much shallower intersection. If the intersection was perfectly aligned with the cylinder's length, that side plane would just have a straight line for its intersection, with no curve at all - although in this case, there's a slight angle, so we get a bit of a curve.

Anyway, all in all - still room for improvement, as is entirely normal, but you're making solid progress here. One last thing though - you've got a lot of extra little lines (especially near the edges of your cylinders where you seem to have added some kind of dashed-lines, perhaps intending to use them kind of like hatching?). Don't - focus only on what is part of the exercise instructions, don't add anything else.

Moving onto your object constructions, as a whole you've done a good job here, especially when it comes to the core focus of this lesson on the concept of precision (where the previous few lessons focused on working in an inside-out manner where we could always pivot and work around any proportional deviations as we continued to build on top of the constructions, here we end up working outside-in in a manner to prioritize the precision of our actions, and the clear intent behind our decisions).

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.

I'm also very pleased to see how much time and attention you've put into your orthographic plans. This is something that was introduced only very lightly in the computer mouse demo, and in an admittedly imprecise fashion (relying only on subdividing into quadrants, and then using those additional lines as guides by which to estimate a little more accurately). It's only more recently - literally last week, so after you would have gone through the lesson material - that I added a section to go much more in depth into this. Looking at how you've leveraged your orthographic plans, specifically as we see in this carafe, this spray bottle, and this guitar, you were already making that kind of extended use of it. That is, not only in terms of identifying specific landmarks, but also in making decisions (for example, where you can round an inconvenient subdivision like 19/50ths to 2/5ths, and when you can't).

Now, in terms of issues to point out, there are only two:

• First off, mind the instructions! As noted in this section, you're not supposed to switch pens between subdivision and construction, or apply a clean-up pass to make your object stand out. Use the same pen through the whole process. I know the desire is to create nice drawings that we can feel good about in the end, but what I want students to avoid is any kind of unnecessary tracing back over of their existing linework, as this tends to make us focus too much on how we're really just drawing lines on a flat page (because we're tracing over lines on a flat page), rather than focusing on how those edges sit in 3D space. Some students may do better with this than others, but in general I want it to be avoided in the work done in this course.

• And secondly, be sure to review this section about handling curves, and look at the demo example at the bottom which was added last week as well. The guitar you drew is a good case where this would have helped - you went in with the curves of the body straight away, but starting it out as a much boxier structure first would help you control the specifics of that structure more easily, while maintaining a solid structure, which would then be maintained more thoroughly when rounding out the structure towards the end. Your approach was okay, but we do end up with a loss in solidity from jumping into curves earlier on. It also makes it harder to pin down specific landmarks in the orthographic plan.

Anyway, all in all, solid work. I'll go ahead and mark this lesson as complete.