The Tom Yardley Jones TARDIS (Original) (1980)

Started by Dematerialiser, Feb 12, 2009, 02:08 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

fivefingeredstyre

Jun 20, 2016, 07:35 pm #90 Last Edit: Jun 20, 2016, 07:57 pm by fivefingeredstyre
Quote from: Tony Farrell on Jun 20, 2016, 12:15 amPresumably - at the back of Steve's mind - is the fact that (as far as we know) no-one has possession of this prop: Andrew Beech apparently owns the 1980 version of the TYJ Box and the 1986 version is on display in Cardiff. So, this begs the question - what happened to the 1983 Box? Where is it now?

If I may, let me try to address Steve's points first - i.e., why bother raising duplicate plans for the same design of Police Box and why I don't think he's correct to question whether control procedures were followed/enforced:

I can't comment on how the BBC operates today (perhaps Matt Sanders might wish to), but I can say for certain that in the 1980s, it was heavily unionised and there was a strict demarcation in job roles. Inherent in this demarcation was the concept of acknowledgement and payment. Actors act, scene shifters set and struck the sets, musicians wrote the scores and designers designed, etc. Everyone got paid for their roles and unions demanded that those people got repeat fees should the programme be transmitted more than twice.

So, if in 1983 a new Police Box prop was required, this unionisation (and the legally binding associated contractual arrangements) would necessitate the drawing of new plans because a new designer was responsible for the story in which the new Police Box prop was to have been introduced. To answer Steve's first point, "why bother?" - because they had to!
Hmmm, to be honest I'm not so sure about this. This is only guesswork as we don't have access to contracts; however this line of thought would also indicate that Yardley Jones should be credited/get a fee every time his box design appeared on screen, likewise the same would apply to Ray Cusick and the Daleks, and we all know that was never the case...

QuoteAs regards Steve's second point - that control procedures might have been relaxed in 1983 - well, no. The BBC has revenues (and expenditures) which are measured in the billions of pounds. Processing this amount of money requires very strict financial controls. It is therefore extremely unlikely that control procedures would not be rigorously followed!
Have you ever worked in the public sector? ;) Ihave for the last 15 years, and even now it never fails to surprise me...

QuoteThis indicates that there were three fibreglass Tardises - the 1980 version, the 1983 version and the 1986 version!
For the record, i'm not against the idea of a third TJY, if they had the moulds available I don't understand why they didn't churn out a different box each year rather than patch up the damage each time. The costs would have been fairly minimal...

I just think, if it existed we would have heard about it before now..

Quote from: domvar on Jun 20, 2016, 08:28 am
I too had noticed the "stile" and "steps" I had always written this off as being these details were attached to the sign box and the variation is due to them moving these around, somewhere there is an image of the newbury box at longleet wearing a TYJ sign box on one side but I cant find a clear shot of it however I did find this:-

police-boc.jpg

Could the sign have been taken out and turned upside down and then the sign box fitted the other way up causing the stile to appear?

if so it would suggest the steps were attached to the side panels and a separate piece altogether on the sides with doors?

Quote from: domvar on Jun 20, 2016, 01:23 pm
I would suggest that the steps are indeed attached to the sign box but not permanently as implied by the photo above as there are no steps.  Something like this:-

Untitled.jpg
I like the idea of this. The "stile" could actually be a locator for the side panels (the lower style could fit over the top of it). If you look at the curved cut out one each end of the sign box, they look to be at a greater radius than the depth of the "stile". Those curved cuts are obviously supposed to fit over the corner pillars of the prop, for a while now I've wondered if the steps were actually a fascia rather than a fixed part of the box (there are a number of pictures around where they appear to be misaligned and protruding outwards from the pillars). If my guesswork is right it could be that the steps fit over the join between the side walls of the box and the sign boxes. We would really need to measure it to be sure it could be covered by the top two steps.

Its also worth noting that the upper stile is also present on the flat frontage Tussauds TARDIS, so it must always have been present as part of the moulding process from 1980 onwards (There's a great picture in the the Tussauds thread where you get to see it face on, it does indeed look slightly narrower in width than the lower stile, and shorter than the height of the steps which could indicate that it is indeed a locator plug for the walls...)

(hopefully all that makes sense, it does in my head...)

The wonky sign boxes could also be down to poor installation on the part of the prop builders - It would be interesting to see for ourselves how the different sections actually fitted together.

One thing to bear in mind as well, the thickness of the border on the sign boxes changes at some point between Season 19 and 20. I've seen it mentioned before that this was because of repair work/changes to the way the signage was fixed to the box; however what if it was because the actual sign boxes themselves were complete replacements and not the original sign boxes?

fivefingeredstyre

Quick question...

Does the damage on Domvars picture of the isolated sign box match any tell tale damage in any insitu pictures?

tony farrell

Jun 20, 2016, 11:48 pm #92 Last Edit: Jun 21, 2016, 01:09 am by Tony Farrell
Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 20, 2016, 07:35 pm
Quote from: Tony Farrell on Jun 20, 2016, 12:15 amPresumably - at the back of Steve's mind - is the fact that (as far as we know) no-one has possession of this prop: Andrew Beech apparently owns the 1980 version of the TYJ Box and the 1986 version is on display in Cardiff. So, this begs the question - what happened to the 1983 Box? Where is it now?

If I may, let me try to address Steve's points first - i.e., why bother raising duplicate plans for the same design of Police Box and why I don't think he's correct to question whether control procedures were followed/enforced:

I can't comment on how the BBC operates today (perhaps Matt Sanders might wish to), but I can say for certain that in the 1980s, it was heavily unionised and there was a strict demarcation in job roles. Inherent in this demarcation was the concept of acknowledgement and payment. Actors act, scene shifters set and struck the sets, musicians wrote the scores and designers designed, etc. Everyone got paid for their roles and unions demanded that those people got repeat fees should the programme be transmitted more than twice.

So, if in 1983 a new Police Box prop was required, this unionisation (and the legally binding associated contractual arrangements) would necessitate the drawing of new plans because a new designer was responsible for the story in which the new Police Box prop was to have been introduced. To answer Steve's first point, "why bother?" - because they had to!
Hmmm, to be honest I'm not so sure about this. This is only guesswork as we don't have access to contracts; however this line of thought would also indicate that Yardley Jones should be credited/get a fee every time his box design appeared on screen, likewise the same would apply to Ray Cusick and the Daleks, and we all know that was never the case...


Can I suggest that you read "Aunty and her Little Villians - The BBC and the Unions 1969 to 1984" by Anthony McNicolas, 2013. You might also wish to read "Trade Unionism in Television" by Peter Seglow, 1978 and "Disorder in the British Workplace" by Ian Maitland, 1980. With respect Steve, we don't need to know what an individual's contract states to know just how rigid demarcation was within the BBC and the importance therefore of correctly attributing people's work/creative input. (Incidentally, the BBC paid Ray Cusick an ex-gratia payment of £250 for the Dalek design even though he wasn't solely responsible for the design itself! In the 1960s, £250 was the equivalent of £12,500 in today's money. Hardly small fry!)

Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 20, 2016, 07:35 pm
Have you ever worked in the public sector? ;) Ihave for the last 15 years, and even now it never fails to surprise me...


No, but I have worked in the pharmaceutical industry for 19 years - so I too know just how bureaucratic big organisations can be. And having lead the refit of my Research and Development Facility, I do know a bit about budgets and the importance of proper financial controls!

Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 20, 2016, 07:35 pm
I just think, if (the 1983 Police Box prop) existed we would have heard about it before now..

Hence the reason why I asked Dom about the provenance of the 'upside-down' sign-box; where did it come from? Is it perhaps a surviving part of the elusive 1983 Police Box prop?

Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 20, 2016, 07:35 pm
For the record, i'm not against the idea of a third TJY


Well since I first suggested that the 1983 plans indicate the existence of an additional Police Box prop, Volpone has already remarked that this thread seems to have descended into a 'dog fight' between us on this point and - again with respect - I do get the feeling from your previous replies that you are resistant to the possibility that an additional Police Box prop was made for "Planet of Fire".

Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 20, 2016, 07:35 pm
Its also worth noting that the upper stile is also present on the flat frontage Tussauds TARDIS, so it must always have been present as part of the moulding process from 1980 onwards


Why? The screen grabs I've posted indicate that the presence of the 'additional stile' above the sign-boxes didn't appear until "Planet of Fire". Do you have reference images to the contrary?

Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 20, 2016, 07:35 pm
(There's a great picture in the the Tussauds thread where you get to see it face on, it does indeed look slightly narrower in width than the lower stile, and shorter than the height of the steps which could indicate that it is indeed a locator plug for the walls...)


As I said, it would be a 'tight squeeze'. However, this ignores the thickness of the fibreglass matting itself. Just because the 'additional stile' is square on the outside, it doesn't follow that its inside profile is also square (which it would need to be if it were to form the basis of a 'locator plug'). A while back, Timerotor posted a couple of photos of the inside of the 1980 TYJ Police Box prop (he restored the 1986 prop and is, therefore, in the best position to identify the provenance of both props):

insideBBCtardis.jpg
insideBBCTradis2.jpg

It seems from these that it is unlikely that the sign boxes could have been fitted upside down. I really don't think therefore that the 'additional stiles' were present on the 1980 TYJ prop (except possibly on the rear elevation). Their appearance on the side(s) of the prop in 1983's Planet of Fire coupled with the existence of the 1983 plans, coupled with the fact that after 1983 we sometimes see these 'additional stiles' and sometimes we do not, indicates to me that there was an additional TYJ-style Police Box prop and that - between 1983 and 1986 - the two props were used interchangeably!

T

fivefingeredstyre

Jun 21, 2016, 07:10 am #93 Last Edit: Jun 21, 2016, 07:13 am by fivefingeredstyre
Quote from: Tony Farrell on Jun 20, 2016, 11:48 pmCan I suggest that you read "Aunty and her Little Villians - The BBC and the Unions 1969 to 1984" by Anthony McNicolas, 2013. You might also wish to read "Trade Unionism in Television" by Peter Seglow, 1978 and "Disorder in the British Workplace" by Ian Maitland, 1980.
No offense mate, but they sound really dull, and I have no trouble sleeping these days :D

QuoteWith respect Steve, we don't need to know what an individual's contract states to know just how rigid demarcation was within the BBC and the importance therefore of correctly attributing people's work/creative input. (Incidentally, the BBC paid Ray Cusick an ex-gratia payment of £250 for the Dalek design even though he wasn't solely responsible for the design itself! In the 1960s, £250 was the equivalent of £12,500 in today's money. Hardly small fry!)
Slightly off topic, but we have Jon Pertwee to thank for that piece of information; however given JP's habit of not letting the facts get in the way of a good story, has the figure ever been verified anywhere else?

Quote
Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 20, 2016, 07:35 pm
For the record, i'm not against the idea of a third TJY


Well since I first suggested that the 1983 plans indicate the existence of an additional Police Box prop, Volpone has already remarked that this thread seems to have descended into a 'dog fight' between us on this point and - again with respect - I do get the feeling from your previous replies that you are resistant to the possibility that an additional Police Box prop was made for "Planet of Fire".
nooo... Couldn't be further from the truth mate.

(and I'd hardly call it a dog fight... Healthy discussion, maybe, but dog-fight??)

I'm just being objective as I'd like us to be as accurate as possible. No one has ever come forward before and said there was a third box; however we've all seen the drawing suggesting there was definitely one planned, but there's been no concrete evidence to tell us that this was ever built. And again, if it was built, where is it? The current whereabouts of all the screen used Police Box props, pre 1989, can allegedly be accounted for except a third TJY.

That's not to say it wasn't built though... ;) (As I've said before I'm surprised they only made two. They had the moulds already - the hard part was done. They could have churned out TYJ's till the cows came home at relatively little cost)

Quote
Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 20, 2016, 07:35 pm
Its also worth noting that the upper stile is also present on the flat frontage Tussauds TARDIS, so it must always have been present as part of the moulding process from 1980 onwards


Why? The screen grabs I've posted indicate that the presence of the 'additional stile' above the sign-boxes didn't appear until "Planet of Fire". Do you have reference images to the contrary?
Here is the publicity shot that dates from the Tussauds exhibitions initial run from 29th August 1980 through to March 1981

Tussauds_zpsxzaxrgro.jpg[/URL]

As you can see the upper stile is clearly present on the frontage. I think we can all agree that this frontage has some connection to the original TYJ, given the similarity of all of its constituent parts.

I cannot recall seeing those pictures of the TJY interior before; however they are really insightful. You can see that the side panel (marked 9) is clearly a one piece construction, as the steps and sign box are moulded into the side wall. As you have shown, pictures of the side walls from the same period also show that there is no upper stile present on the side wall, externally...

The height of the upper stile in the Tussauds picture is clearly shallower than the height of the stepped section below the sign box. Because the sign boxes are clearly part of the side fascia's tells us that Domvar's picture is taken from a front or rear sign box, which was designed to be demountable. Given that the other pictures you have posted from the same period as the Tussauds exhibitions initial run do not have the upper stile, and the Tussaud's picture does, I'm would say that Domvar's suggestion that stile was always present on the underside of the boxes, but was covered by the front and rear step sections is accurate (many screenshots exist with the "Front" signboxes fitted securely, but the step section is misaligned, indicating that it could well be a "plant-on" part).

Now...

As I had said, I cannot recall seeing the pictures of the TJY interior before (im guessing those are of the MK1?) but they clearly show those side panels were of a single piece construction, which debunk's my idea that all the sign boxes were interchangeable and demountable!  ;D

Here are clearer screen grabs from The Twin Dilemma and Timelash

Twin%203_zpsours2oaf.jpg

Timelash%201_zpstsacnljk.jpg

The clearer shots back up your assertion that the upper stiles appear and disappear more often that the TARDIS itself does...

This is a long shot I took at the Experience last year of the TJY Mk2

TJY2%20Long%20shot_zpsv7akfnw6.jpg

And when blown up to full size you can see the upper stile is clearly present on the right hand side wall

TJY%202%20Cardiff_zpseq3nys68.jpg

This is the close up of a picture I took of the Left hand wall (Which I took at Olympia in 2011 - I'd upload the full shot, but Photobucket is playing games at the moment...) Its not the best picture but you can just about make out the upper stile in this face of the prop as well (I'm going to Cardiff next weekend, so I'll make sure I get some better pictures of the box from all available angles then...)

Olympia%202011%20cropped_zpspdw2sf3s.jpg

This, coupled with screen shots of the rear face posted in other threads, shows us that the upper stile was present on all sides of the Mk2.

I have to say that, with these internal pictures Tony does paint a convincing argument for the existence of an additional TJY, other than the two we can already account for; however I did pose this question in the TYJ 2 thread on the 17th June:

Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 17, 2016, 06:44 pm
Following on from a topic being discussed in the Mk1 TJY thread, do we know if this box was actually built for the Mysterious Planet, or was it built earlier?

Plans exist that suggest that a new box was built for Planet of Fire, some three years earlier, could this one have been built then?


What evidence do we have that the Mk2 was built in 1986, could we not actually be looking at the Mk2 and it was built in 1983?

tony farrell

Jun 21, 2016, 08:40 am #94 Last Edit: Jun 21, 2016, 10:00 am by Tony Farrell
Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 21, 2016, 07:10 am
Quote from: Tony Farrell on Jun 20, 2016, 11:48 pmCan I suggest that you read "Aunty and her Little Villians - The BBC and the Unions 1969 to 1984" by Anthony McNicolas, 2013. You might also wish to read "Trade Unionism in Television" by Peter Seglow, 1978 and "Disorder in the British Workplace" by Ian Maitland, 1980.
No offense mate, but they sound really dull, and I have no trouble sleeping these days :D

They are very dull! Though in fairness, of the three, Mr Mailand's is the best read. I envy you your ability to sleep by the way!

Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 21, 2016, 07:10 am
The height of the upper stile in the Tussauds picture is clearly shallower than the height of the stepped section below the sign box. Because the sign boxes are clearly part of the side fascia's tells us that Domvar's picture is taken from a front or rear sign box, which was designed to be demountable. Given that the other pictures you have posted from the same period as the Tussauds exhibitions initial run do not have the upper stile, and the Tussaud's picture does, I'm would say that Domvar's suggestion that stile was always present on the underside of the boxes, but was covered by the front and rear step sections is accurate (many screenshots exist with the "Front" signboxes fitted securely, but the step section is misaligned, indicating that it could well be a "plant-on" part).


As I've said, I can't find any screen grabs showing the rear of the TYJ Mark 1 Box. As I've also said, this 'additional stile' could well have been always present on the rear elevation. What I said was it wasn't present (i.e., it can't be seen) on either the front or sides, so, there must have been at least two 'starting' moulds (rather than the one mould which you initially suggested (an idea which both Marc and Dino said they tended to support)).

Between us, we are beginning to get the basis of an agreement here - the original 'master' plug from which the first TYJ Box was drawn cannot - as you initially suggested - just have been one side, one sign-box, one corner post and the roof. There has to have been a separate 'master' plug from which the rear (and possibly the front) sign-box was drawn. So, maybe not the full wooden box as I initially suggested, but definitely more than just one side piece.

As regards the misalignment of the front sign-box concealing the 'additional stile' (I really am going to have to come up with a more concise term than 'additional stile'  ;) ), I'm not convinced: The establishing shot of the TYJ Box in "The Leisure Hive" shows no mis-alignment and the 'additional stile' - let's just call this 'the stile' from now on - isn't visible either:

The Leisure Hive 1.jpg
df5853cca47c245393b0b4df54fe40b72ebe4f54.jpg

From this, the inference I draw is that Dom's "upside down" sign-box is actually the rear sign-box (or a mould drawn from the rear sign-box 'master'). Similarly, the elevation seen in Madame Tussaud's could equally just have been drawn from the rear sign-box mould. Thus, rather than being some sort of 'locating plug', the stile on the original 1980 fibreglass prop could therefore just be to indicate which way round the prop should be assembled (rather like the little marks on the original Dalek casings which showed which top belonged to which base). Or - even more simply - which elevation should be used as the 'front' of the prop. Does that make sense?


Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 21, 2016, 07:10 am
As I had said, I cannot recall seeing the pictures of the TJY interior before (im guessing those are of the MK1?) but they clearly show those side panels were of a single piece construction, which debunk's my idea that all the sign boxes were interchangeable and demountable!  ;D


As I've said - we're beginning to edge towards the basis of an agreement.  :) And yes, according to Timerotor (who restored the TYJ Mark 2 Box), this is the interior of the Mark 1 (1980) Box.


Quote from: fivefingeredstyre on Jun 21, 2016, 07:10 am
I have to say that, with these internal pictures, Tony does paint a convincing argument for the existence of an additional TJY, other than the two we can already account for; however I did pose this question in the TYJ 2 thread on the 17th June: Following on from a topic being discussed in the Mk1 TJY thread, do we know if this box was actually built for the Mysterious Planet, or was it built earlier? What evidence do we have that the Mk2 was built in 1986, could we not actually be looking at the Mk2 and it was built in 1983?


To be honest Steve, I hadn't seen your comment in the 1986 thread. The statement that the second TYJ prop was constructed in 1986 is 'plastered' all over Tardis Builders. The moderators would be in the best position to let us know where this has come from - it certainly pre-dates my joining this forum, and I've just 'kind of' accepted this as being accurate. Is it something which comes from Purpleblancmange? He definitely states this in his definitive history of the Tardis props - http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~trekker/policeboxes/props.html

I have to concede, maybe there were only two versions of the TYJ prop after all and far from being constructed in 1986, the second version was actually constructed in 1983. This would make sense given 1983 "The Planet of Fire" plans!

Now, I've long disagreed with some aspects of Purple's history of the Brachacki Prop (and I've presented my version here on TB), perhaps we should now be querying his supposed definitive history of the TYJ prop as well! The Moderators might also like to amend this article: http://tardisbuilders.com/index.php?topic=2380.0

I'm really rather glad I 'chipped in' on this topic - it seems that I've 'opened a second can of worms' and that the supposed definitive history of the TYJ prop (here on TB and elsewhere) is actually far from definitive. I've said all along I dislike the word 'definitive' because someone can always come along and point something new out. So Steve, it seems what Volpone called our little 'dog fight' has done precisely that.

It seems that from 1983 onwards that there were indeed two TYJ-style fibreglass Tardises in existence and that they were used inter-changeably from that point in time!

History can be changed after all!!  :)

T

gerald lovell

For what it's worth, my understanding is that the TARDIS prop seen in "Planet of Fire" was not a full-sized prop and the camera angles were carefully chosen to try and disguise that.

domvar

I think that second interior picture answers a lot of this.

1. There is a bar running down the middle of the side panels for strength
I would propose that the side panels had this bar added early on for strength.

2. The Madam T Is a cast of one of the sides after this had beendone

3. There were extra sign boxes made
We can be pretty certain of this because the image I posted was from a 1993 auction and as far as I know neither box is missing one.
We also have the change in size of the opening for the sign that Steve mentioned.

Perhaps the later sign boxes were cast from a side panel and used on the front.

I'm inclined to think following Gerald's comments that the plans were recalled in 83 for the production of the model or just for the creation of repair parts.

I think the chances of a 3rd full size prop are unlikely as it would have surfaced somewhere by now

tony farrell

Jun 21, 2016, 01:09 pm #97 Last Edit: Jun 21, 2016, 01:33 pm by Tony Farrell
Quote from: gerald lovell on Jun 21, 2016, 10:31 am
For what it's worth, my understanding is that the TARDIS prop seen in "Planet of Fire" was not a full-sized prop and the camera angles were carefully chosen to try and disguise that.


Hi Gerald, it would be interesting to hear where you got this information from.

I can conceive that the prop used on Lanzarote was a model (i.e., to save on transportation costs) however if it is a model, it is the most accurate and detailed model we've ever seen in the series (both classic and new) which begs the question why wasn't it ever reused?

planet of fire location.jpg

As can be seen, if it is a model, they've even gone to the trouble of mounting the central style on the correct door!

However, this really doesn't answer my central point - that "Planet of Fire" is the first time that the 'additional stiles' appear above the side sign-boxes:

planet of fire1.png

And the studio shots of the prop are definitely the full-sized version:

planet of fire studio1.jpg
planet of fire studio.jpg

So, Dom, something has very definitely been done to the full-sized prop at the time Planet of Fire was recorded (and the 1983 plans indicate that a new box was constructed for this serial). If you read Steve's previous comments, he has suggested that TYJ (mark 2) wasn't constructed for 1986's "Mysterious Planet" (AKA The Trial of A Timelord) but was instead constructed some 3 years earlier for Planet of Fire.

Steve's comments make sense in that, in stories after Planet of Fire, we sometimes see the additional stiles and at other times we do not (so, this indicates that two Police Box props existed sided -by-side and were interchangeably used). Now, if you read my previous post, you'll see that I have now accepted Steve's proposition i.e., that there were only ever two TYJ-style boxes and that the assertion (here on TB and elsewhere) that a box was constructed in 1986 is incorrect.

Steve has also asked what evidence is there that the second box was constructed in 1986 (rather than in 1983). I replied to this point that I had simply 'gone along' with Purpleblancmange's (and Crispin's/Scarfwearer's') assertion that a box was constructed in 1986. I do not know on what basis Purple and Scarfwearer made that claim.

So, to sum up, I am correct to say that the additional stiles first appear in 1983 - this leads me to believe that a new box was constructed then (this is supported by the plans - which are not marked 'cancelled' or 'omit' (which is the case on previous plans which have been amended)).

Where I think I was incorrect was for me to simply accept 'received wisdom' that an additional box was constructed in 1986. So, I no longer think that three TYJ-style Boxes were made, there were only two BUT, Purpleblancmange's chronology IS wrong, the second TYJ-style box was constructed in 1983 and not in 1986.

Does that clarify things for you?

T

meantimebob

 I think it's pretty obvious in the publicity shots of Davison, Bryant and Strickson fooling around on the sand that the Police Box behind them is a model. A quick google image search will find them.

tony farrell

I'm sorry but I don't understand the relevance of the model in a publicity shot. All the pictures I've posted are screen grabs from the serial and show the full-sized prop (which is what we're discussing).

meantimebob

I'd say the screengrab of the Police Box on the beach is the model. As far as I remember, there's no point in the story at which an actor is seen next to it or leaving/entering it on location. I'd say that was a model in the foreground with Strickson in the background. The prop in the studio is of course the full size version.

tony farrell

Thank goodness we're not disagreeing about the studio screen grabs!

T

meantimebob

Not at all. I do wonder though, if the location model is the one from Logopolis?

tony farrell

Jun 21, 2016, 08:29 pm #103 Last Edit: Jun 21, 2016, 08:37 pm by Tony Farrell
Given that my copy of Planet of Fire is an old one, another possibility for the location shots has just occurred to me; it could still be the full-sized prop butt CSO'd (Croma-keyed or Colour Separation Overlaid) onto the filmed footage. Due to the age of my copy, it could just be that we're not seeing the characteristic blue 'haze' around the overlaid Tardis' edges!

Anyway, as I say, it's the chronology of the various TYJ-style Boxes that we're currently discussing. So, as Steve has asked, what actual evidence do we have that the second TYJ-style Box was actually introduced in 1986, as opposed to what I now think was the case, in 1983?

I've had a good look around here on TB and I can only find Purple's and Crispin's assertion but, regrettably, they don't appear to have offered any evidence to back their assertion up. (By contrast, we have the 1983 plans and the appearance of the 'additional stiles' in Planet of Fire which would tend to support 1983 as the introductory date for the second TYJ-style Box.)

The different styles of sign-boxes don't seem to offer proof either way as both props could have been 're-dressed' at various points with the same style sign-boxes so that the two boxes would appear to be identical. The only difference in the two props is the small detail of the extra 'stiles' which - as I say - first appeared in Planet of Fire.

To coin a phrase, the Devil is in the detail!

T

domvar

Looking at this image from maudrin undead the stiles appear on two sides from this point and this also coinsides with the change to the thicker edged sign boxes.

d05-6f-c065.jpg

I have another theory for what happened

The sign boxes had started to look a bit battered by this stage and the signs were often protruding at the edges.

I suspect larger signs were made and stuck over the top and a bigger sign box was stuck over the top, which is what is shown in the picture of just the sign box.

cons.jpg

This much later image seems to back that up because the old sign is visible through the later one and it appears the bottom of the sign holder has broken.

d07-018.jpg

This approach may have initially been produced for tusauds to allow a lamp bulb to be changed without removing it from the wall and then adopted for the real prop, there is another president for this sort of thing happening when the tusauds dalek skirt (oddball) appeared in Destiny of the daleks.