3 ms·
I had a look. Wasn't as bad as I expected based on what you'd said. In fact, for a 90s corporate website it looks fine. Nice job winning the pitch!
by bartread 4y ago
I had a look. Wasn't as bad as I expected based on what you'd said. In fact, for a 90s corporate website it looks fine. Nice job winning the pitch!
- samizdis 4y agoHa! That's decent of you. I was actually quite proud of the site weight. The orange triangle gifs - one pointing to the right and another pointing downwards - weighed almost nothing, and everything nav-wise was optimised (transparency out of background colour) to the max. The nav font was their bespoke version of frutiger, hence the need for graphical nav elements. When it all worked, there used to be historical quotes, which I'd culled from a privately published Barings history book I found in their offices, that appeared under the l-h nav elements. One, from Cardinal Richelieu, referred to Barings as one of the "three major powers in Europe". The book also related how Barings joined forces with its archenemy Rothschilds (under the auspices of the British Relief Association [1]) to provide relief to Ireland during the potato famine, in the absence of meaningful action from the British government. I really enjoyed the work, and learnt a lot of history. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Relief_Association https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Relief_Association
- icelancer 4y agoI agree. This site looks fine for its time. Above-average, even.
- NovaVeles 4y agoThere was show on here a few days ago (The dark side of the 90's) all about the Beenie Baby craze. It funny that they covered the website that was pitched by 2 teenagers with only a few days work and eventually approved. Needless to say - it screams mid 90's web design. https://web.archive.org/web/19961228114553/http://ty.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/19961228114553/http://ty.com/