Starting with your form intersections, I can definitely see that your comfort and understanding of these relationships between your forms have definitely developed nicely. While I by no means expect students to be able to nail them all perfectly at this stage, it's basically the last few lessons worth of manipulating and combining forms in 3D space that really helps develop students' capacities in this regard, enough that we can provide some additional information to help it along - information that might not have made as much sense before.

One of the things I want to mention is that intersections occur between surfaces - not forms. A form can constitute of many different surfaces. I'm noticing some tendencies in your work to think more about intersections between forms - so for example, here you've got an intersection between the base of a cone and a box, which you've represented with an ellipse for the intersection. However, what's intersecting with the box is the base of the cone, which is flat - not rounded. Similarly, the surfaces of the box that are involved in the intersection are also flat. Thus, the intersection is between flat surfaces, and should thus be made up of straight lines.

Intersection lines ultimately are made up of the intersections between different pairings of surfaces, stitched together. Give this diagram a read - it should help break down the manner in this works, and give you something to work at as you continue pushing forwards. We'll revisit these again in Lesson 7.

Oh, one other point before I continue on - you are at times rather sloppy in some of the decisions you make in regards to aspects of your linework. I can see cases where you'll redraw a mark reflexively, and others where you trace back over your marks (often with extremely wobbly linework). Remember - line weight is executed using the ghosting method, like any other stroke, and should be focused only on the localized areas where your forms overlap, in order to clarify how those overlaps work.

Continuing onto your object constructions, there's a lot you've done very well here, as well as a number of points I want to draw to your attention. First and foremost though, when it comes to the core principle of 'precision' that this lesson focuses on, you've done a lot of good. While lessons 3-5 work primarily in a sort of reactive, inside-out manner - that is to say, we could start with a cranial ball that's way too big - for our purposes, that's not a problem. We'd simply end up with a head that's too big as a result, because we'd roll with the punches and keep going. This lesson marks the first time that we're shifting towards working outside-in.

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.

Now, one thing that helps immensely when it comes to making things more precise, is using orthographic plans before approaching our constructions - and I'm very happy to see that you did this a great deal. The important point here is that it allows us to make decisions ahead of time. Now, the more decisions we can make while putting together these orthographic studies, the better - and this is something that the current iteration of the lesson doesn't touch upon enough (this will be fixed when my overhaul of the course reaches this point, but for now I'm sharing this info in the feedback I provide).

So for example, as I've shown here there are more landmarks we can pin down, in terms of figuring out exactly where along each dimension (in terms of fractions) does each landmark sit? The more we can pin this down for as many landmarks as possible, the more of those decisions will no longer have to be made on the spot when actually approaching the construction.

These of course don't have to be perfectly accurate - accuracy is not what we're concerned with. So, we have the room to round those positions, especially in terms of positioning something at 4/5ths instead of 39/50ths (given how much more tedious the latter would be). Of course, if we have two details that end up rounding to the same position, we do have to figure out where we have to push that subdivision further to get more "resolution" to our decision making.

Another important way in which precision can be improved is avoiding jumping right into curves, but rather representing curving structures with boxy ones. I talk about this in these notes, but here's a coffee mug demo which helps to show it in the construction of the handle. You can compare this to how you approached your coffee mug, which was really more drawn by eye.

Now, there are inevitably situations where we don't make all our decisions before jumping into a construction, or where we don't end up using orthographic plans. There are still ways in which we can make our decisions prior to putting marks down, even as we work on the construction itself. For example, in this toaster, you could have defined the footprint where the knobs/buttons connect to the body of the toaster first by drawing the horizontal and vertical boundaries (basically defining a rectangle on the structure), then establishing an ellipse within it, then extending that ellipse out into a cylinder. While it means the decision is being made only slightly ahead of the form itself being drawn, there's a considerable benefit as long as we're not thinking about where the marks should go while we draw them. This should be identified first, just as where we put points down in the planning phase of the ghosting method.

And that covers it! Of course, this lesson is the first major introduction to the concept of working with precision - we'll continue leaning on this hard into Lesson 7. So! I'll go ahead and mark this lesson as complete.