Design that makes a product easy to use, accessible and visually consistent. You review wireframes and a clickable prototype before any code is written, while screens are still quick to change.
Design pays for itself soonest on products people use again and again, and on flows where losing a few users is expensive, like signup, checkout or any form. If people reach your site and don't do what you want them to, that's usually a design problem before it's a traffic problem.
Structure comes before decoration. Wireframes settle what goes on each screen and in what order. Then the clickable prototype answers something a static mockup can't: whether the path through the product makes sense when you follow it.
Prototypes also settle arguments that documents can't. Two people can agree completely on a written description of a screen and picture two different things, and the prototype is where that comes out cheaply.
The same product on a phone and on a desktop is two different design problems. We design screens for both sizes from the start, because squeezing a wide layout onto a phone is where things break.
Designing for both sizes also forces decisions about what's really essential. A layout that works at 375px is usually clearer at every width.
Logo, palette, type and the rules that keep them consistent once more than one person is using them. Those rules are what turn a set of files into a brand.
Without written rules, a brand drifts as soon as a second person starts applying it. So the deliverable is the system as much as the artwork: colour roles, type scale, spacing, and when to use each.
Watching someone use the product is the cheapest way to find out what's confusing. We test on the prototype, while changes are still inexpensive.
Five participants will find most of the problems, which makes testing far cheaper than people expect. The expensive version is finding the same problems after launch, through analytics that show people left but not why.
Colour contrast, focus states and keyboard navigation are decided along with the visual direction. Adding accessibility afterwards usually means recolouring a finished design, which rarely works out well for either the look or the accessibility.
It usually makes the design better for everyone, too. Good contrast, clear focus states and sensible tap targets are simply better interface decisions.
Every project goes through the same five stages (discovery, design, development, testing and deployment), so you always know where things stand. As a guide, a simple website takes about two weeks, web apps three to four weeks, mobile apps one to three months, and custom CRM or ERP systems two to four months. The exact timeline is agreed in writing before work starts.
You deal with one point of contact and get a progress update every day. At handover we deploy the product, set it up, and give you your accounts, your data and a user guide. We keep the source code, and every agreement says so. There's more on how we work on the about page, and the full toolset is on our tech stack page.
Often the design stage is where "what I want" gets specific enough to build. A clickable prototype is quick to make and regularly changes the brief, which costs far less than changing it during development.
Yes. We can deliver design on its own, with files and a documented system your developers work from. We'd rather hand over something buildable than something that only works as a picture.
Yes. Accessibility is part of the design from the start: colour contrast, focus states and keyboard navigation are decided along with the visual direction. Adding it afterwards usually means recolouring a finished design, which rarely works out well.
Tell us what you're trying to build. We'll set up a requirements session and come back with the scope, our approach, a fixed quote and a realistic timeline. If this isn't quite the right fit, you can see all seven services.