I can see all four images clearly.

### Visual critique: draft2 vs reference sheet

Exterior hull piercing from `previous.jpg` is resolved: ribs, thwarts, and floor timbers no longer poke through the outer planks.

| # | Finding | Severity | Acceptance condition |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | **Transom cut is dead vertical**<br>The stern cutoff in `draft2-side.png` drops straight down at 90 degrees. Reference sheet has a ~15 degree aft rake with sheer rising to the stern. | **High** | Tilt transom back ~15 degrees and sweep the gunwale line upward at the stern to match the sheet elevation. |
| 2 | **Too many thwarts (seats)**<br>Draft 2 has 3 full cross-benches plus the stern bench (4 seating rows), crowding the cockpit. Reference sheet has only 1 center rowing thwart, 1 small bow seat, and 1 stern bench. | **Medium** | Remove the redundant forward bench; restore open cockpit spacing for rower legroom and floorboards. |
| 3 | **Faceted bow stem and flat keel profile**<br>Bow stem transitions into the keel with an abrupt hard corner instead of a smooth fair curve; bottom run lacks the gentle hull rocker shown on the sheet. | **Medium** | Fair the bow curve continuously into the keel line and taper the stem post flush to the gunwale nose. |
| 4 | **Oarlock mounting hardware**<br>Draft 2 places raised rectangular dark metal baseplates on top of the gunwale. Reference uses clean flush pin sockets directly bored into the timber rub rail. | **Low** | Remove rectangular surface plates; sink oarlock pins flush into the gunwale timber. |
| 5 | **Hull plank relief and wear map uniformity**<br>Clinker overlap edges look flat/stepped without bevel shadows; peeled paint distress is evenly tiled across every plank rather than concentrated at waterline and rub areas. | **Low** | Increase normal bevel depth on lapstrake edges; concentrate wood wear and peeling along the waterline and gunwales. |

***

0. **Blocked on you**: nothing.
1. **What you changed**: no files modified; delivered an independent visual critique comparing draft 2 against the reference sheet and rejected geometry.
2. **How you know it works**: inspected all four asset files (`sheet.jpg`, `previous.jpg`, `draft2-final.png`, `draft2-side.png`) directly in the viewer and cross-checked dimensions, silhouettes, and hardware placement.
3. **What would break if you were wrong**: modeling revisions based on this feedback would alter the stern profile and seating layout unnecessarily. Reverting means keeping current draft 2 meshes.
4. **What you did NOT do**: did not open Blender, did not inspect wireframes or polycounts, and did not edit any project files.