Troughton's Tardis

[policeboxnut]

tis the left side - the roof slanted up toward the front if memory serves....

[DoctorWho8]

tis the left side - the roof slanted up toward the front if memory serves....

Well, it's the left side if you are inside the box.  If you are facing the front (which is on the left as you can see the 3/4 moulding on the corner post), we are seeing the right side. The roof was pushed too far back and is overhanging the backside.
Bill Rudloff

[markofrani]

OK, here's my theory as to why it is definitely the left side we can see on the Seeds Of Death picture and not the right. The window pane tint arrangement is identical to slightly later pics of the prop in the Pertwee era showing the left side. As far as I can see from any other stills, this arrangement is unique to the left side of the prop. On the 'Spearhead From Space' photo you can also see that the front/left-side corner posts have no quarter round detailing between them. One post simply butts up to the other. Once again I have found this to be the only corner of the prop affected in this way. That would account for the Seeds of Death pic showing the right post having no quarter round detail. Hope that makes sense?  This presumably made the whole prop even more wonky and unsymmetrical than originally thought!

[purpleblancmange]

I must admit, this has caused me to scratch my head ever since we first discussed this issue a couple of years ago now - prompted by those screen grabs I made from Seeds and Spearhead.  Thing is, much later it looks to have the beading back, but the imagery is so fuzzy, it's difficult to be sure... whatever is going on there, it just looks very weird and uneven.

It would also explain why the roof overhang tapers towards the front on the left side in the other grab you've done and why in the Seeds shot, the wall clearly doesn't fit as it should, revealing parts of the outer stiles that would normally be hidden behind the posts - making the three steps fall quite short of the posts too if you look.

Having said that, in some shots, the beading does appear to be there further down the post, but not at the top - could be an illusion, but clearer images are needed. 

There is another shot I'm aware of, of the prop at the BBC after it had been retired, where the beading looks to be back.  This could have been a repair post its time in the series as it was tarted up, given all new windows, a roof and even rope tie hooks in the tops of the corner posts for some reason.  That said, one of the walls were completely scrapped... oddly, I think it was the left wall.

[purpleblancmange]

Well, would you Adam 'n Eve it?  I've just dug out my 1:1 scale plan view of this box, dated 1st of December 2005 and on it is this note to myself (in amongst lots of other notations), "Why the hell is there a 3/4" difference here?"

Now this relates to the fact that I'd included the gap either side of the three steps below the sign box on one of the side walls, but also kept in the beading on the post.  One wall lines up as it should, the other doesn't and is wider.  But if I remove the beading on the front of the post and recalculate it, suddenly it pulls back into allignment, but then the wall looks skewed and the roof doesn't sit on squarely. 

It would be very interesting to get some clear images of the prop from the start of Tom's tenure and see what's going on there.  There's a chap who lives not too far from me and he has a photo library that most would kill for.  I think I should pop by there and see if he has anything that may be helpful.

[Rox]

I suppose we have to look at how the programme itself was made in those days, and the attitude toward the props [and the programme itself].

As such, we were waaay before continuity being a big issue, and I'm sure the prop guys were just given the instruction to put the Tardis in a particular place.  Whether it was actually put together right, bodged through repairs or just slung together was irrelevant...  It's probably like 'familiarity breeds contempt' in a lot of ways - such a familiar shape and size, as long as it looked okay, the director/producer probably didn't pay much attention.  The Tardis was a big blue box that got repaired and slung in the corner as an 'in' to the episode.  After all we all know that episodes were slung in the bin, and the programme itself was seen as a kids show.

I'm wondering - were the posts completely removable?  Is it possible that between seasons it was put together with different corner posts in different positions?  And if the prop guy didn't want to take it back apart, you'll get photos with different posts in different positions... and if the Tardis isn't fully square [I know mine isn't!!!], a different corner post would explain the size discrepancy.

[Rox]

p.s I looove the knackered Tardises.... it so looks like they've been through the mill, and I've always loved the idea that Hartnell nicked a knackered one from a repair shop on Gallifrey...! 

[Scarfwearer]

Just to keep things in perspective, I watched most of Jon Pertwee, all of Tom Baker, nearly all of Peter Davison and some Colin Baker as a child, and in all that time I don't think I ever noticed that the TARDIS prop had changed at all...
Continuity in those days meant "details you can still remember after a week from a 25 minute episode of exciting action, with no access to video footage, repeats or screen shots."
(Am I getting old, or what? )
Deducing the history of the props is no less fascinating for that, though - and if I was to build another TARDIS, it would probably be this one...

Crispin

[Rox]

I definitely never noticed either... until it turned into an organ or something in a Colin Baker episode...!! 

I suppose to deduce what went on, you'd need to look at the stories in production order rather than transmission order...

[zbigniev hamson]

Just an odd question, I thought I'd ask it in here instead of starting a new thread...

When the box was repainted in 72 and the phone panel was repainted to have a black background instead of blue... can anyone speculate as to how they did that?

The first version of the panel seems to be nothing more complicated that white lettering painted onto a blue background... so how was it possible to repaint the background, and yet (apparently) leave the lettering EXACTLY the same? Obviously it could be possible, but it would probably take more effort than simply painting the whole thing black and then doing the lettering again from scratch. And from the position of the lettering it doesn't look like they took too much care the first time round as some of it is rather off centre. So it seems odd that after the repaint it's all still a bit haphazard in exactly the same way. It's almost as if they managed to paint UNDER the lettering somehow.

[DoctorWho8]

It's possible whatever the lettering was made from, it may have been paint resistant, so they would have wiped it off.  Either that or they were very meticulous about painting around the letters.
Bill Rudloff

[dustyfro]

What if the letters were on a clear piece?

[genesis1]

Also I notice from the picture, the 'Police Box' lit at the top over the doors, also changes. Its lettering is Light on dark to begin, then reversed later to have dark letters on light perspex lit from behind. When did this change?

[Rassilons Rod]

The front and rear "Police Public Call Box" sign graphics had also been amended and replaced for reasons currently unknown, as such they both had a slightly different font from the originals. On the front side, the lettering was transparent with a frosted flood background, while the rear side version retained the lettering stuck to the surface of the frosted cobex.

Taken from The TARDIS Library, which states that it was done at the time of Evil Of The Daleks. This site was made by 2 of our members, I gather they have been planning an update for a while but it is the most accurate write up you will find (other than the details you will find here, of course ).

Hope that helps