Hello, yes it is the station point or viewers position seen from plan view and the picture plane is the viewers window. the station point DOES NOT dictate the placement of the horizon line that is the viewers choice or it could possibly be implemented into a elevation view but for now it is up to the viewer, i do wonder if I confuse the issue I hope this helps.

Great job exploring shapes that are not simple rectangles! Angles other than 90 degrees and sides that are not parallel make these interesting examples. I think you need to make a small adjustment in how you apply the technique in order for this to work. All lines that go to a common vanishing point are parallel. In Marshall's example, he used a rectangle which has two sets of parallel sides and thus he required two vanishing points. In your first example, the top view shows that you don't have any parallel edges, all four edges extend at different angles to the picture plane. This means that the lines through the edges in your perspective projection must each go to a _different_ vanishing point. You can either use four different vanishing points (one for each edge angle, determined just as you did for the red and blue edges) or you can put your shape in a rectangle (or a parallelogram), use the edges of the rectangle to place two vanishing points and then determine the position of your shape inside the rectangle (e.g. by using a grid approach within the rectangle). The same is true for your pentagon shape. None of the edges are parallel so you either need five vanishing points or you need to place the pentagon in a rectangle. Aside: The lines that go through a single vanishing point only intersect at that vanishing point. The vanishing point is on the horizon which is very, very far away and can be thought of as at infinity. Thus the lines never really intersect which means, by definition, they are parallel. Exceptions to this would be the horizon line and a vertical line through the VP, both of which would be in the zone of distortion so I think we can ignore them.

Also I'm so sorry if I'm being dumb

Your perspectives appear distorted because they lie outside of the 60-degree cone of least distortion. This limit will appear as a circle on the picture plane, centered on your eye level. To find it in your plan, draw a 60-degree cone with its apex at your station point and note its intersection with the picture plane's edge view. Measure the diameter of the cone at its intersection with the picture plane. To establish that intersection In your perspective, draw a circle, centered on your eye level at your center of vision, with a radius equal to half the diameter you just measured. To appear undistorted, your perspectives of the block need to be contained within that circle.

wait, is the bottom one incorrect because the object is placed behind the observer therefore that should not be happening?

Great work! Yeah, I can’t wait to learn about the cone of vision from Marshall rather than than the books because anything outside of it seems to be very distorted

I cant remember where but i remember a shot of the construction lines of a sphere in the last few lesson videos, i took a stab at it after i got more comfortable with the technique in this lesson.