Model 1

Before

After

2D Sketch Analysis

The height of the SO is comparable to the height of the SD. Moreover, the height of the SD is similar to the width of D. Thus, the height of SO should become much more smaller and make the SD smaller as well. I turned the SO to the other side so that the width of the SO vary compared to SD without making the SO much smaller. And I pierced the SO so that it can be seen from other angles as well. The model came out with clear D, SD, and SO with the nice balance of volumes. However, I did not make this a final model as I felt that it is not as interesting composition as the final model.

Model 2

Before

After

2D Sketch Analysis

Model 2 had a lot of problems. In some angles, the D has less presence compared to SD. SO should move more towards the ⅓ of SD and could me thinner. Moreover, it is stacked towards one side, so it would be nicer to counterbalance the composition by putting SO to the other side.

Model 3 (Drafts of the Final Model)

Before

After

2D Sketch Analysis

So this is the 2 drafts before the final model. At first, SO was too big compared to SD, so SO was reduced a lot in both lengths and height. SD had similar height to D’s width. So, I reduced it to ⅔ of D. After the second model, the D was too big compared to SD and SO, thus, the size of the dominant was reduced. After reducing the width of D, it looked similar to the height of SD, thus SD was reduced again. The orientation of SO also changed to counter balance the SD. Before, SO and SD was placed on the same side. After changing, SO was placed at the other end diagonally opposite of SD. SO looked slightly similar to SD, thus the size of SO reduced a lot from the top view as well, which led me to the final model.