Jumping right in with your form intersections, there's a lot here that you're doing that is actively making the exercise harder than it strictly needs to be. There are other issues, but they largely range between things that make sense when considered against the confusing nature of the linework that can make it very difficult for you to parse out those intersections, and the kinds of things that are still pretty normal to see at this point in the course (despite being introduced in Lesson 2, the exercise is one we revisit here and in Lesson 7, each time taking the opportunity to call out certain kinds of issues when it is most appropriate to do so). All that is to say, this could have been done better, but it's more like calling out an olympic runner for doing badly when they were only wearing one shoe.

The issues that held you back come down to the following:

• Your linework at times gets cluttered and messy from you going back over lines multiple times. While this can happen by accident when ghosting lines (where the pen will accidentally graze the page), what we really want to avoid is the student going back over marks they've made because they want to fix a mistake.

• You appear to be, at least in many cases, drawing the intersection line both where it's visible to the viewer, and where it's not. This of course lines up with the general trend where we encourage students to draw through their forms so they can better understand how the forms they're drawing exist in 3D space. This certainly applies in this exercise as well, to the forms, but when it comes to drawing the intersection lines it's best to stick to how it was demonstrated in the instructions and only draw the intersection lines where they would be facing the viewer. This is because it simply gets way too confusing to parse out intersections that wrap all the way around, to the point that even I struggle with it, and with years of experience of doing critiques, I've gotten quite proficient at parsing exercises where all the forms are drawn in their entirety. While there are definitely things that do make things more difficult that we ask students to do, even we have our limits where they cease to actually be useful and serve as a detriment to the student's actual learning/improvement.

• In general, I do think that your linework would benefit from taking a little more time for the planning phase of the ghosting method, to help avoid any other issues that may arise from jumping to the confident execution a little too soon. Anything that impacts the clarity of our linework here will inevitably make the exercise more difficult.

Now, I do have some notes about the intersections specifically. Here I've picked out a few that stood out as being incorrect.

• Towards the upper left, where you've got the cylinder intersecting with the pyramid, you've got the intersection line hooking back around slightly, turning into a bit of an S-curve. This is something we see when two curved surfaces intersect with one another, but that is not the case here - the curved surface of the cylinder is intersecting with the flat surface of the pyramid, so it would only be a simple curve with no recurve at the end.

• Also for that cylinder, I noticed that it was drawn with parallel side edges on the page (and therefore no convergence/scale shift to suggest foreshortening). This was a major issue that came up in your cylinder challenge work - that it is coming up here suggests that you will want to review that material further and reflect on why you ended up doing 75 additional cylinders for the challenge.

• Moving a little to the right, we see an intersection between the same cylinder and a cone. My correction here may not actually match up with your intent for the orientation of the cone, but when taking the sphere into consideration this appeared to be the most logical resolution.

• Continuing further to the right, where the pyramid intersects the box, it appears that you factored in the wrong edge when deciding which planes your intersection line was cutting across.

• And lastly, for the sphere/box intersection, the intersection here is all kinds of confused - it appears that you're drawing an intersection that would not be visible to the viewer, but you're factoring in the edge that is oriented towards the viewer. The sphere may be in front of the box instead, but then we don't really see any interaction between it and the pyramid. There's a chance this one may not be wrong, but again - going beyond the visible intersections demonstrated in the instructions is only asking for trouble.

Now, I expect that giving yourself a little more time to plan/prepare for your linework, avoiding those extra strokes and sticking to the intersections that are situated such that they can be seen by the viewer will help a lot - but in addition, I wanted to provide this diagram which I often share with students at this stage. It helps explain how intersections exist between different pairs of surfaces, rather than in a specific memorizable way between pairs of forms (something your work clearly demonstrates that you understand). It also shows how those intersections change when we replace a hard edge with a rounded edge, which is the sort of thing that results in that recurve/s-curve intersection line, which is something you were having some trouble with.

Fortunately you won't require any revisions for this, as you'll be doing more of them in Lesson 7 - though I would recommend putting more focus on form intersections in your warmups between then and now.

Continuing onto your your object constructions, while there are a few cases towards the beginning that your constructions are weaker - for example, this lighter doesn't rely on as much subdivision as it could, and even more notably is constructed inside of a box that is diverging as its edges move farther away from the viewer rather than converging, which would definitely throw the construction off - but after a few of these you start nailing them quite well.

Your couch for instance demonstrates a fairly thorough use of subdivision, and shows that you're taking your time in identifying how to approach each step (rather than relying more estimating by eye). Your constructions continue to push further in this regard as we get further through the set, which I am happy to see.

One thing I want to note is that your submission did not include any orthographic plans that might have preceded the constructions. While this does not mean you did not use orthographic plans when constructing your objects (and many of the later constructions suggest that you likely did, considering just how dense your use of subdivision got), and I don't think the instructions specifically ask students to include them, I do want to cover the possibility that you may not really know what I'm talking about so I will point you to these notes which include a link to an informal demonstration showing how these orthographic plans should be used.

The last point I wanted to call out is that for this pepper shaker, you approached the curves of the structure's body with the same kind of general estimation/eyeballing that we want to avoid. This section from the notes explains that we do not want to jump straight to a curve without first laying down some kind of structure that will directly support it - like a chain of straight edges or flat planes. This chain allows us to define the structure in specific terms, and then we can round them out - as demonstrated in the coffee mug demo linked in that section.

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