Series 8-10 Tardis "F" Dimensions

Started by Violet, Apr 23, 2020, 07:39 am

Previous topic - Next topic

Violet

Having a few issues with prior plans made for this design of box in mind, and a friends' request for plans of it, I felt it a good idea to 'throw my hat in the ring', so to speak.
Tony Farrell has previously measured the 'G' version of this box at being 1365 millimeters wide, this was the foundation of my version.
As an aside, related to this note, I do feel it's at the very least possible that the Tardises introduced for Time of the Doctor and Under the Lake/Before the Flood were of a separate plan-set to the (to my understanding) prior 'D' and 'E' boxes, which were seemingly identical to each other; with the 'F' and 'G' boxes being - with dw_1200's plans in mind - about 2.5 inches or 60 millimeters slimmer, along with other proportional differences.
I do not feel these can necessarily be attributed to Doctor Who's 'tradition' of boxes not quite matching their planned counterparts. Perhaps someone could shed some light on this?

Regardless, I have assembled my own plan versions of this particular design, and whilst they are certainly not perfect (being done in imperial measurements, comfort zones and whatnot), I do feel they may be slightly closer in terms of measurement than prior versions.

I haven't yet proceeded with alternate top/inside views, but I feel for now the overall proportions will suffice. They are drawn at 16 PPI, so any dimension not listed can be derived.

As I do not know how to do photogrammetry, the higher up you go, the higher chance there is that I have gotten something wrong. I am reasonably confident in what I have, however. (I've been throwing around a 65% figure, even if jokingly)

Ultimately, this isn't much better than pixel-counting assisted guesswork, and I am certainly hoping that a more talented person than me will give the box the full treatment in the future.
View1.png
View2.png

BioDoctor900

Out of Curiosity, and maybe I'm being a bit stupid, but would it not be worth asking Jam Jar Lurker to take measurements of his TPE Matt Smith biz, seeing as Simon who makes them would be going off the original measurements??

BioDoctor900

wolf_man22

the Smith box measurements thisplanetearth has was from measuring the smith capaldi E prop the main box used in series 6 to 7 what i believe they are trying to figure out same as i is the dimensions and measurements for the Capaldi box used in series 8 to 10 a completely different box both boxes side by side as reference Capaldi F on the right Smith E on the left34fyh.jpg

BioDoctor900

Well from looking at the two boxes, there's only a few differences I can notice. The top signs are slightly wider, the recessed panels are slightly wider and taller and the window frames are slightly thicker, but surely using a TPE box would be the best way to go as you would have a basis to go off of, without trying to guess from screenshots as the perspectives aren't always correct, whereas a physical replica prop, you'd have measurements off of a physical thing

BioDoctor900

Violet

I did specify my reasoning at the beginning of the thread - but juggling terminologies can make it difficult for others.
To restate, and hopefully make it clearer:
From what I have understood, the two boxes used by Matt Smith from Series 5-7 ('D' and 'E') were structurally identical to each other.
However, the one introduced in Time of the Doctor ('F') and its subsequent "twin" introduced in Under the Lake/Before the Flood ('G') had a number of differences - shared between them - which I feel aren't quite able to be chalked up solely to the boxes not usually following the initial plans.

The main thing pointing towards a new plan-set is the main width. As I have specified prior - Tony Farrell has measured the 'G' iteration at 1365 millimeters wide. This, compared to dw_1200's photogrammetry-derived measurement of the overall width of the 'D' box being 1425 millimeters wide (a difference of 60 millimeters or 2.5 inches), is the basis for me thinking they might be derived from a new set of plans.
This also calls into question what other differences there could be, which, as the modern boxes haven't quite been given a big focus on this forum prior, I am hoping to 'open the door' for someone to do a more accurate job.

Me doing this is also partially a project for a friend who is hoping to build their own Capaldi box in the future, and they did reach out to the BBC and ThisPlanetEarth, who both denied his request.
I admittedly did not think to ask anyone who owns a ThisPlanetEarth box for dimensions. Though I feel the need to bring up that if someone were to have gone through that trouble, I'd be in much the same position of retrofitting Smith box measurements to fit the Capaldi box.
As wolf_man22 brought up, ThisPlanetEarth's "Smith/Capaldi" box offering is derived from the 'E' box - which is not the same as the one I am seeking to get more accurate measurements for.
Does this help clear things up?  :)

BioDoctor900

Your terminology isn't difficult to understand at all. What I however am trying to state is, in my opinion it would be easier to try and extrapolate measurements from something we already know. You've stated that the later boxes are slimmer, and what I am suggesting is surely you could use the earlier box measurements to try and work out where the discrepancies in sizing are. For example you could have a photo of the Early box with the later box overlayed and then, by using known measurements, such as the lock, work out the difference in measurements?

I know Tony has stated a lot previously that a lot of his work on getting correct measurements has occasionally been tricky as trying to go from screen grabs, isn't the most reliable due to the way camera lenses are set up, which is why if you have solid measurements from a solid object, I would find that a lot easier to work out the differences

But that's just my opinion and it's probably not worth anything  ::)

BioDoctor900

Violet

That is essentially how I went about it. I used the 'D' box measurements as a base and slowly changed and modified things where they weren't fitting. Pixel counting on images and such. This is difficult, however when you don't know how to do photogrammetry, and accounting for perspective can be confusing.
I don't have access to the original box, and with only one - broad - measurement to go off of as certain, it can be problematic to ensure my work is correct.
I'm not fully understanding, honestly, but I did start from a 'solid object' and work from there.

Apologies if I have given off the impression that I do not value your opinion.

wolf_man22

im Currently in the process of making a capaldi box using the simmilar method DW_1200 used to build his 2010 box model , using an orthographic shot of the box to build the basic model and align it with reference images and alter the model til it fits exactly therefore giving me the correct measurements but its mostly just trial and error til it works as my previous plans were off slightly its early days EWUEtvxUYAMkj6I.jpg