Jumping right in with your form intersections, your work here is progressing well in a lot of ways, although admittedly you definitely set out to deal with some pretty challenging intersections here, especially ones that crossed over multiple forms, which was definitely a complex problem to tackle. I've made some notes directly on your work, but the main things of note are:

  • Remember that your intersections occur between specific surfaces. There are going to be situations where you feel tempted to guess at what an intersection's going to be like, but always try and think about why you're making the decisions you're making. For example, in the cylinder-box intersection towards the top, you placed a corner at an arbitrary position (just kind of floating in the middle of a plane, not near any other edges), and so that begs the question, why. Decisions we make for a reason - even the wrong reason - are useful, because we can analyze why they occurred, and identify a potential misunderstanding to address. Decisions made arbitrarily, because we're overwhelmed or just unsure, aren't terribly productive because they don't give us insight to the thinking that underpins the decision.

  • Try and think of any flat surface involved in an intersection as though it's the blade of a knife, where the orientation of that blade dictates the orientation of the cut (the intersection line). You have some cases that are really good examples of this (like how this pyramid is cutting through this box), although there are also cases where it's not done as well, like the box-pyramid intersection I corrected at the bottom-center of the page.

  • And just in general, keep this diagram (I believe I shared it with you back in Lesson 6's feedback, so you can review what I said there for more context) in mind.

Continuing onto your cylinders in boxes, you're technically doing this one correctly, but the limited amount of line extension you're applying isn't really enough to tell us anything of use. Those extensions should be considerably longer - even if it means getting closer to, or even cutting into other cylinders - so you can properly assess whether those sets of lines are converging consistently.

Moving on, your work on the form intersection vehicles is coming along very well. Often students overestimate how complex we want this to be, but it's really just how you've got it - a series of primitive forms, arranged in the plan of a vehicle. The purpose is to remind us that even though some of the more complex, detailed vehicle demos can seem like a forest of lines that are only tied together into a complete object towards the end, we are still adhering to the principle of starting big and simple, and working our way to small and complex. Effectively, still carving out of a block of wood, rather than building things up with toothpicks.

Finally, looking at your vehicle constructions, I am very pleased with how thoroughly you've been leveraging your orthographic plans to help control the proportions and structure of the 3D constructions. You're taking a great deal of time in laying them out, and then applying the steps in 3D space, and by and large it's being applied quite effectively. There is however one main thing I want you to keep in mind, and I think it will make a meaningful difference by addressing some issues that, though you're doing most things right, are probably having a pretty big impact on your results.

This has to do with your initial bounding box. Basically, right now you're drawing it in such a way that foreshortening isn't really applied to it very strongly, if at all, resulting in very minimal convergence. Foreshortening - that is, how much should be applied in a given situation - actually does have some rules to it, but they're pretty simple. Bigger objects, as well as objects that are closer to the viewer's eye, will have much stronger foreshortening, and objects that are farther away or objects that are very small, will have very weak foreshortening, causing them to flatten out. So in essence, a small object will generally be drawn with minimal foreshortening, but it can have more foreshortening when brought very close to the viewer's eye, and vice-versa. In this case, we're drawing some reasonably sizeable objects, but the absence of foreshortening tends to make them feel more like toys. Increasing the foreshortening can make these constructions harder, but leveraging your ruler to show you how the line you're about to draw will extend into the distance will help you judge those convergences better before committing to a stroke.

Because this step comes so early in the construction process, it tends to ripple throughout the entire process. For example, having your bounding box drawn with edges that are too parallel (when they should be converging more) will also throw off the "constructing to scale" approach we use (leveraging the two ellipses to transfer a unit measurement from one dimension to another).

It also definitely doesn't help that when you aim for basically no convergence, it's very common to end up accidentally overcorrecting and ending up with more divergence, which'll further make things look weird.

The other thing I wanted to point out is that when you're using that constructing to scale approach, there are two important things to keep in mind, which as shown here, are not being applied correctly:

  • Your minor axes need to be aligned correctly with the bounding box's VPs. The ellipse on the right side should be aligned with its minor axis pointing to the left VP, and vice versa for the ellipse on the left side. Your ellipse guide should have little markings for its minor axis line, but make sure that you draw your intended minor axis line in with your ruler first so you can control how it's oriented before using the ellipse guide.

  • You seem to be little gaps between the two ellipses, which is going to throw your proportions off. They need to be touching right at the corner of the bounding box, as we're using their width/degrees to help define the size of a unit measurement. If one is a little off from that corner, then you're inherently giving that side's unit measurement a little extra. To that point, I also noticed that this one only had one ellipse defined, which explains why its proportions were way off.

As a whole though, I'm still pretty pleased with your progress, and I think that your comfort with this kind of construction (especially dealing with the forest of lines and keeping track of everything) is developing even throughout this set, with the later constructions like this boat and especially your tractor coming out extremely well. So! I'm pleased to announce that I'll be marking your lesson - and the course as a whole - as complete. Congratulations!