Jumping right in with your form intersections, you're doing an excellent job of not only demonstrating a strong capacity to arrange these forms such that they feel consistent with one another as they share the same space, but the intersection lines themselves do an excellent job of suggesting a strong, well developed understanding of how the forms relate to one another in three dimensions. Similarly, you're doing quite well with your cylinders in boxes, demonstrating a strong capacity for maintaining fairly consistent convergences, and in the estimation of the proportions of each square face.

Continuing onto your vehicle constructions, as a whole you've done really well, but there are some ways in which I feel you may have cut some corners, and perhaps relied too much on that existing, well developed understanding of 3D space. That may sound counter-intuitive - after all, if the drawings are all exercises intended to develop one's underlying grasp of 3D space and their spatial reasoning skills as a whole, then surely someone who has those skills developed already would perform better. But it all comes down to the nature of what an exercise itself is.

An exercise is an opportunity to continue to develop and sharpen the skills it addresses. An exercise features specific rules and approaches, and it is the following of those approaches that engages the brain in such a way that it effectively targets the further development of those skills. Conversely, if we use a drawing as an opportunity to demonstrate or perform the skill in question, we might skip certain steps to show how much we can visualize in our minds - and in doing so, we dilute the effectiveness of the exercise's ability to develop those skills.

When it comes to these constructional exercises, the focus all comes down to working with precision. This is something you did exceptionally well back in Lesson 6, and while your work is by no means bad here - in fact, your drawings are all phenomenal - the difference comes down to the degree of precision with which you were working.

Precision and accuracy are terms that are often conflated with one another, but they are two distinct things. Accuracy speaks to the ability to make the specific mark you set out to produce, whereas precision speaks actually to what we do before executing our mark to define and convey to ourselves and to others which mark it is that we intend to make on the page. So for example, when the ghosting method was initially introduced, we'd mark out a start and end point in the planning phase, so we'd know where we wanted our straight line to start and end. The act of defining those start/end points increases the precision of the drawing, regardless of whether or not we miss the mark upon its execution.

So in that sense, precision speaks to the steps you've taken to convey your intent for every mark - the more we subdivide to find the specific positioning of certain features, the more we work with straight boxes to provide greater structure for our curves (as explained here in Lesson 6), the clearer we make our intent prior to actually acting upon it.

I really can't stress this enough - your drawings are excellent, and I can definitely see the fact that you're thinking about what your intent is prior to the execution of each mark. For you to get the absolute most out of these kinds of exercises however, you do need to be actively drawing those marks on the page, even though this will inevitably increase how time consuming each drawing becomes. That is simply what is intended for the work in this course.

Looking at your car drawings, you generally would focus your attention on the bottom half - using subdivision to position the wheels with precision, and to build out the general proportions of the whole vehicle correctly. For the rest however - the chassis, and really anything sitting along the top half of the car, you tended to rely more on eyeballing proportions instead. You have certainly demonstrated yourself to be extremely proficient at this, but again, when performing this as an exercise in the future, it's important that as your brain works through the different logical steps, that you put signs of that thinking on the page. In a sense, it's like math class - it's one thing to get the right answer, but showing your work, demonstrating how you got there, is more valuable for the purposes of learning and improving.

Aside from that, I really have just one other fairly minor thing to call out, pertaining to your use of filled areas of solid black. For the most part, you're doing an excellent job of focusing primarily on cast shadows in the use of those filled black shapes, but there are some places where you drift back into the territory of form shading instead. In most of your drawings it gets a bit blended in, but there are a couple of examples I can warn you against more easily:

• On this ATV, you filled in the wheel well itself with black. Compositionally, this was an excellent choice - it helps the wheel itself pop. In terms of the restrictions we employ for this course however, it does break the prohibition on form shading, in that it is purely focusing on the fact that certain surfaces, based on their orientation in space, are either lighter or darker.

• We can also see this very prominently in this boat, where again that underside has been filled in.

There's a fairly easy rule of thumb we can employ to avoid this - in the vast majority of situations, when you draw cast shadows, it will generally involve designing a separate, new shape, rather than filling in one that already exists. With the underside of that boat, or the wheel well, you ended up filling in a void that was already present in the drawing, rather than designing a shape that conveys the relationship between a specific form (which casts the shadow), and the surface that receives it.

Of course this rule of "no form shading" is something that exists only as a part of the course, and it arises from the fact that we are working with a limited set of tools, and the capacity to only make marks that are full black or, in the absence of those marks, full white. As such, we have to abandon capturing certain information (like local/surface colour, and form shading) in order to focus on that which we can convey most clearly given our limited tools. By focusing on cast shadow shapes only, we're able to lean into the viewer's expectations and more clearly convey the relationships between different forms in 3D space - which is effectively the goal of construction as a whole.

There are definitely situations where the previous point - the skipped steps - would be grounds for revisions, and I have assigned them in similar cases before. In your case however, I will not - simply because every other aspect of your work demonstrates an incredibly strong grasp of the core principles of this course, and the fact that you have indeed demonstrated the capacity for the level of precision we're looking for back in Lesson 6. To assign revisions would suggest that you are missing some understanding, and that is simply not the case.

You've earned the right to consider this lesson, and the course with it, as complete - so congratulations. Just be sure that when working in the future, you consider the difference in intent between a drawing done as an exercise, and a drawing done as a performance/demonstration of your existing level of skill.