Hudolin Movie Prop Plans

[ionsith]

I didn't post any plans, I think that was the post above mine. The plans I am working on came from that thread. It must be the bevels that are out. The frustrating thing about 3DS Max is that all the beveling is done in units rather than degrees, so figuring out the correct slope or pitch can be frustrating!

Thank you for the help though, much appreciated.

[galacticprobe]

I didn't post any plans, I think that was the post above mine.

Oops... you're right. My mistake. My stanky old wizzard(sic) eyes blurred the two posts into one.

Dino.

[DoctorWho8]

I thought the bevels were 22.5º on the TYJ and Houdlin.
Bill "the Doctor" Rudloff

[ionsith]

You may well be right, but I had read somewhere that the TYJ bevels were 21 degrees. My problem is converting 22.5 degrees into a measurement 3DS Max will understand.

[lespaceplie]

The panels of the Hudolin prop have a funky shape (or an overlay). See the first page of this thread.

[frax owen]

Hello all I'm not sure if any in detail Hudolin plans are yet available but there is some fantastic info in this thread. Did the panels have bevels all the way round please? Or just bottom and sides?
Also does anyone know how far the signs stick out from the posts?
Many thanks

[too_many_cars]

I have a complete set of prints I made up for when I was going to have a Hudolin box made for myself from wood.  I used the original production plans as a start, then checked the scale of various features and the overall height based on the actors' heights.  Some of the tiny trim may not be exact, as I messed with materials until I found something in standard wood sizes.

Also - this design is my own take on wall thickness (including a design for a skinny phone box so the door can open most of the way, and rounded corner frames on the inside for a seamless interior banner) so it doesn't include the fat doorframe on the original.

It would be fun to see these get some use - right now, I'm finishing up a commission to have a This Planet Earth fibreglass box restored with McGann details, which isn't 'screen accurate' but is a lot easier to take to shows, and is accurate to the Eighth Doctor Adventures book covers (so good enough!).

If anyone can host a PDF to upload to this topic, I also have these plans in PDF as well as a rotatable '3D PDF' so you can move it to any angle and look at the view.

Cheers

--Brian

[too_many_cars]

Thanks to lorisarvendu, here are the PDF print and rotatable 3D model:

http://spacewarp.co.uk/who/Hudolin/1996_solid_rev1_3D.pdf
http://spacewarp.co.uk/who/Hudolin/1996_solid_rev3_inches_export.pdf

You may have to download the PDF and open it in Adobe Reader (instead of a browser) to enable the 3D model.

Enjoy!

--Brian

[Kingpin]

Some really nice plans there, though for a set of publically-available drawings for the forum, I think it would be worth producing a revision to include the ship's lantern used on the final prop, and to remove the cubby hole behind the Pull to Open panel.

[too_many_cars]

I'll email the plans and 3D model to whoever wants to modify it in solidworks, or feel free to draw the exterior in some other program and tweak however you like.

I didn't dimension the lantern because I already had a lantern, and these prints were for a carpenter.

--Brian

[tony farrell]

I do like these plans Brian and the way in which they are presented is very clear and easy to follow. (It would be really good to see the modified TPE Box which you mentioned - one can never have too many Tardises especially the 'under-represented' versions such as the McGann/Hudolin Box.)

I see (like Gene's/Lespaceplie's) that Brian/Too_many-car's plans are now several years old and - since there's no time like the present and I had a couple of days spare - I thought that I might 'have a go' at the Hudolin Box plans myself.

Given this version of the Tardis only appeared in one adventure, it is perhaps unsurprising that so few photos of the box exist/were taken/have made it into the public domain. That said, since Brian and Gene produced their versions of the plans several years ago, two or three good quality photos have emerged. (One of these even shows one of the Tardis' doors square on to the camera - more of that in a moment....)

The emergence of one of these photos provides us with more information as to the Hudolin Box's construction and comparing this to other - already available BBC - HD photos affords us the opportunity to revisit the plans and to note details that haven't been remarked upon before.

Where to start? Well, I suppose at the top of the McGann/Hudolin Tardis is as good a place as any.....  

UPDATE: The post caps have been modified. Note that the quarter round molding on the caps is .5" instead of .75" like it is on the edges of the posts. The lintels stick out 2.5" but might need to be even more.

This picture is already available on the forum:



And here - from a larger version of the same picture - are the post caps:




The post caps on the full-sized Hudolin Tardis don't have quadrants at all! (Even on the quarter-scale model, the post caps don't have quadrants but rather simply have chamfered corners:



Mention of the model has prompted me to mention a couple of differences between it and the full-sized Tardis. As this photo shows, the post caps are considerably shorter than those of the full-sized prop; this results in the roof's lowest step appearing too tall on the model.



The second difference to note between the model and full-scale Tardis is depth of the sign-boxes; on the model, they are considerably shallower than they are on the full-sized prop. On the full-scale Tardis the sign-boxes are twice as tall as they are deep:

The lintels stick out 2.5" but might need to be even more.

2.5" isn't enough; here, I agree with Brian's plans - if the sign-boxes are 6" tall, they have to be three inches deep!

Okay, continuing our journey down the box, we turn to this (recently emerged)
picture:



This is clearly a picture of the Tardis whilst it is still under construction; the lamp has yet to be fitted. Secondly, we can see through the windows to the back of the box and beyond; the light boxes/window backings have yet to be fitted.

Contrast the above with this shot of the interior of the completed Tardis:



Note the windows have now been blanked-off. Note, too, the depth of the left-hand door's inner stile and compare this thickness to the thickness of the doors' hinged stile:



The hinged stile behind Daphne Ashbrook is approximately two inches thick but the inner stile seen next to Paul McGann is much nearer to three inches thick. I'd suggest that the inner stile had a piece added to hide the window backing/light-box from view when the doors are open.

Close study of the McGann publicity photo reveals that the window backings/light-boxes fitted on the side(s) and rear of the box were single piece units that covered both the top signage and the windows themselves (the bottom edge of one of these covers can be seen behind Mr. McGann's shoulder). Additionally, the covers have one inch wide notches cut into either side. This - to me - indicates that the light-box covers were detachable (rather than permanently fixed in place) and the notches act as hand-holds to allow the covers to be hooked or slotted into place:



Unlike, say, the Eccleston/Tennant/Smith boxes where four fluorescent strips can be seen illuminating each window, the back-lighting on the Hudolin Box is subtly achieved with no obvious lighting source being visible. As well as being separately illuminate-able from the top sign-boxes, it seems the windows on the doors could be separately lit from those on the sides (and, possibly, the rear).


Top sign only lit.


Doors lit but not side?


Fully lit.

I mentioned a photo showing the Tardis door square-on to the camera and here - continuing our 'journey down' the Hudolin Tardis - we turn to the doors:

Up to now, everyone seems to agree that each of the four recessed panels were/are 15.5" tall and that these four panels were/are separated by three cross-rails which were/are each 3" tall. Both Gene and Brian's plans agree on this point but differ on the widths of the recessed panels with Gene stating them as 13.5" wide whereas Brian gives this dimension as 13.25". Again, I emphasise that this picture has emerged since both Gene and Brian created their plans:



In this photo the open door is square-on to the camera whilst the camera is pointing very slightly down relative to the Tardis (this results in the recessed panels appearing to get slightly shorter the further down the door we look). However, this "perspective distortion" is only very small and, because the door is square-on to the viewer, can be compensated for.

Here comes the boring mathematics (sorry)  :

If each of the four recessed panels are 15.5" tall, then for the uppermost panel 15.5" equates to 266 pixels. In the middle of the door the panels are 263 pixels tall and the bottom panel is 262 pixels tall - this slight apparent shrinking is due to the 'perspective distortion' caused by the camera angle.

So lets take the window panel as our first example; The window panel is 266 pixels tall by 231.5 pixels wide. If 266 pixels equals 15.5", then because the door is square-on to the camera, the width of the window panel can be calculated: 231.5 divided by 266 multiplied by 15.5" = 13.49". For the middle panel its height is 263 pixels and its width 229 pixels. 229/263 x 15.5" = 13.5".

The remaining panel sizes can be similarly calculated and - as can be seen, the four recessed panels are each 15.5" tall by 13.5" wide.

But what about the height of the cross-rails which separate the four recessed panels? The same methodology can be applied: The cross-rail immediately below the window is 56 pixels tall. 56/266 x 15.5" = 3.26". The middle cross-rail is 55/263 x 15.5" = 3.24". The average of 3.26 and 3.24 is 3.25".

The height of the three cross-rails which separate the four recessed panels is 3.25".

The door's bottom cross-rail works out at 3.5" tall. Taking the height of its chamfered section as being 1" tall, the height of the base equates to 5" tall with a 1" clearance between it and the floor:



It's alright, you can come back now, the maths lesson is over!  

With these observations in mind and (subject to photo-grammetric confirmation) without further ado, the plans!




(Plans posted as low-resolution JPGs to get them under the forum's 500KB upload limit.)

T

[Angelus Lupus]

Very nice work, Tony!

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest - looking at the relatively dim, diffuse and blue-ish nature of the window lights, plus the lack of depth between the window and that panel - that they used Electro-Luminescent (EL) sheets for the lighting?

[watcher]

Excellent plans!

Just for the curious, here are some shots of "This Planet Earths" version of the box from one of my friends on Facebook who has one.
Not sure about the accuracy as they couldn't get access to the original for measurements, but I love it, and the craftsmanship is exceptional!

[the_doctor]

Nice work. Yeah loads of differences between the studio scale model and the final full size prop. Currently making a 3d printed version (of the model) and it's crazy the amount of alterations needed including the height of the roof steps etc. Still, I'm now happy it looks the part. Pics to follow when it's done.

[fivefingeredstyre]

Excellent work as ever, Tony!

I have to say the Hudolin is one of my favourite boxes, it just looks so sturdy, solid and bloody well built - even down to fitting flush bolts on the rebates of the left hand door leaf.