11th Doctor's library card

Risu said:
Agreed on all points except the number, I can't make out half of them. Could be 82389.
Click to expand...

This is going to become our new version of the barcode on the back of the book version of A Journal of Impossible Things, isn't it? :p

Despite all my filtering, what eventually made me see the third digit as a 9 (Which is the hardest digit to see) was keeping my head at an extremely oblique angle to my screen, it made it pop out as a 9, with its look pressed right up against the top loop of the 8 that follows it.

-Nick
 
Thanks for all the investigative work. To my eyes the number is 87389 and I agree on the 'Identification Card', 'Dr J Smith', 'Not Transferable' (tho the end is cut o and 'Shoreditch' parts. It's also clear now that the name and address are typewritten not handwritten.

I've updated the card and I'll post the WIP tomorrow. It looks like all we need now are the date, post code and small print.
 
87389 Nov.

Dr. J. Smith
76 Totter's Lane
Shoreditch
London, EC1 5EG

SHOREDITCH LIBRARY
Present this card each time you borrow a book.
You are responsible for books borrowed on this card.

Identification Card. Not transferable.
 
Last edited:
deck5 said:
87389 Nov.

Dr. J. Smith
76 Totter's Lane
Shoreditch
London, EC1 5EG

SHOREDITCH LIBRARY
Present this card each time you borrow a book.
You are responsible for books borrowed on this card.

Identification Card. Not transferable.
Click to expand...

Looking at the screencaps I took this morning (Attached) there's definitely something extra after Nov. looks like a '2' which to my mind would mean it reads Nov. 23rd. And if there was a year I'd guess it was '1963'. :)

Will take another look at them later, but all the other details you've grabbed looks dead on. Will definitely give this a go as I'm pretty sure I have a book with that Hartnell picture in...
 
MacMantis said:
Looking at the screencaps I took this morning (Attached) there's definitely something extra after Nov. looks like a '2' which to my mind would mean it reads Nov. 23rd. And if there was a year I'd guess it was '1963'. :)

Will take another look at them later, but all the other details you've grabbed looks dead on. Will definitely give this a go as I'm pretty sure I have a book with that Hartnell picture in...
Click to expand...

I agree, the date is very probably Nov. 23, 1963.
 
deck5 said:
I agree, the date is very probably Nov. 23, 1963.
Click to expand...

Unless the BBC post a PDF version of it (nothing thus far and doubtful tbh), it appears again (also unlikely... it was a one note gag), or it falls into private hands who posts detailed pictures of it (who knows, but in the immediate future... unlikely) I think we're unlikely to ever find out for certain, but I'm definitely going to go with that for mine.
 
deck 5, your eyesight is amazing!
McMantis, those HD screencaps helped a lot. It'c clear now that the right hand side of the card os cut off by the wallet it's in, and that I was mistaken in thinking any of it was handwritten. I still think the number and date are red, tho, and they're in larger text than the rest. A period solution would be that those were done with the rubber stamps libraries have.

Using all this info and overlaying the screengrab I still have 2 points that need your help. The overlay shows where the card is cut off by the wallet, the black line shows where the wallet ends. Going by this it looks like the date can't have the year on it, and the bottom line of small print needs a minor rewording.
 
Angelus Lupus said:
Using all this info and overlaying the screengrab I still have 2 points that need your help. The overlay shows where the card is cut off by the wallet, the black line shows where the wallet ends. Going by this it looks like the date can't have the year on it, and the bottom line of small print needs a minor rewording.
Click to expand...

No, you've still got room -- see attached, I've overlaid your image on the screenshot. Also, I suggest abandoning 'Nov. 23RD 1963' in favour of the more likely 'Nov. 23, 1963'. If space still proves difficult, I'd go with simply 'Nov. 1963', as library cards of the period didn't generally have a date, but simply a month and year.
 
NakedMoleRat said:
librarycard.jpg
Click to expand...

I know this is slightly off topic, but when I saw this picture, there is only one thing that popped into my head: "It's me! It's just an old picture." :lol
 
Right, it's done! I've also resized it, based on the known dimensions of UK passport photos. I'll be putting this up in the paper props section too.
Clickable thumbnails because 300dpi makes huge images.

Final version:


And for those that would like to print the elements separately (i.e print the photo on photo card and tear it yourself):


Thanks to everyone whose eagle-eyes and HD screencaps made this possible.
 
Last edited:
Awesome! Thank you so much! I can't wait for the next time someone asks me for ID. :p

-Nick
 
Ah well... call that artistic licence. Besides, in the screen cap it does look like there was some colour added to the photo. There's nothing stopping folks desaturating the image, tho.
 
I just did a test printing.
Top is the colour version printed on off-white card. Bottom is the plain version printed on some old grey-ish scrap card with the photo stuck on. Once it's beind the plastic of a wallet, I'm not sure the difference would be all that noticeable.
 
I threw together my own version of the graphics this afternoon, and knocked out this card.

It's printed on a double-thick buff card-stock. The photo is printed separately on white card-stock, cut out, and glued on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Michael Bergeron
RPF 2014 Halloween Costume Contest - WINNERS ANNOUNCED!
13 14 15
Replies
285
Views
55,924
Michael Bergeron
Michael Bergeron
yt
Love it or Hate it: Here's Some Top Gun Trivia
2
Replies
35
Views
24,817
yt
yt
Back
Top