Jumping in with the form intersections, your results here are a little mixed. You're doing a great job in drawing the forms themselves such that they remain consistent and cohesive within the same space, and you are demonstrating clear improvement in your spatial reasoning skills and your understanding of how those forms relate to one another in 3D space, but there are still quite a few intersections that are off. I've marked them out here.

You'll notice that I also drew little blue arrows signifying the trajectory of given surfaces in different dimensions - for example, a cylinder will curve in one dimension, while having a straight run in the other. Breaking down these surfaces into individual directions/trajectories can help, because the intersections themselves tend to be a combination of these different individual paths - the trick is figuring out where we go from one to another.

If we look at the cone-box intersection towards the center of the page for instance, you drew the intersection as a simple straight line running along the base of the cone. If we look at the box however, it's got two relevant faces which intersect with the cone, set at 90 degrees to one another with an edge in between. Once we hit that edge, the trajectories shift dramatically, and so there should be a pretty sharp turn in the intersection line as well, in order to realistically continue to follow the surface of the box while still sticking to the surface of the cone. With the straight line you drew, it feels more as though it passes through the volume of the box, while following the cone's base.

Another suggest I have is to only draw the part of the intersection that is oriented towards the viewer (and thus visible). I know that we generally really stress the importance of drawing "through" forms as though we have x-ray vision, but given how complicated form intersections are to begin with, this can help eliminate some of the visual confusion at play.

Continuing onto your object constructions, your work here is considerably more consistent, and generally quite well done. I can see that you've put a good deal of effort into a number of very important elements of this exercise. For example:

• I'm pleased to see just how much you've allowed yourself to rely on subdivision to find the specific locations of different elements prior to actually drawing them (something I'll talk about a bit more in a moment)

• It's great to see that you're mindful of keeping those curves structured and specific by maintaining boxy forms with sharp corners, then rounding those corners out.

The thing about this lesson is that it is the first real spot where we put our foot down and decide that what we draw must be planned and identified prior to the execution of our marks. I mean, sure - with the ghosting method we take the time to identify the mark we wish to make, and there is ample planning in that - but lessons 3-5 are still very forgiving in that regard. Here, however, we start to focus much more heavily on the concept of 'precision'.

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.

Anyway - with that core focus of this lesson, you're doing a great job and have demonstrated considerable patience and care, taking as much time for each step as is strictly necessary. Ultimately Lesson 7 will be more of this - but much more. As long as you can maintain the focus on taking your time, on giving each mark as much time as it individually requires, and accepting that some drawings will simply take many, many hours, I think you should do fine.

So! I'll go ahead and mark this lesson as complete.