Everything from a single marketing site through to a platform with accounts, permissions and integrations behind it. We build the front end, the back end and the CMS your team will actually use day to day.<\/p>
The starting point is never a theme. We work out what the site has to do, what content it has to carry and who maintains it, and the architecture follows from that.<\/p>
Clean, documented code in a stack chosen for your situation rather than our convenience. It has to be maintainable by somebody who is not us, because at some point it will be.<\/p>
Everything is tested across browsers and devices, checked for accessibility and performance, and instrumented so you can see what is happening after launch.<\/p>
Businesses whose requirements do not fit a template: unusual content structures, real integrations, or a workflow that off-the-shelf tooling fights rather than supports.<\/p>
We agree the structure before anything is styled: what each page has to do, what content it carries, and who maintains it after launch. That document is what the estimate is built on, and it is what stops the project drifting.<\/p>
Design and build then run in short passes with you seeing real work every week or two, on a real URL, on your own phone. There is no reveal at the end, because a reveal at the end is where expensive misunderstandings surface.<\/p>
We do not have one answer we apply to everything. Laravel or Node on the back end, React or a server-rendered front end, and a headless or traditional CMS depending on who is editing and how often.<\/p>
The deciding question is who maintains this in two years. A stack chosen for our convenience rather than yours is a stack you will pay to escape.<\/p>
Speed is not something applied at the end with a caching plugin. It comes from decisions made early: how much JavaScript ships, how images are handled, what renders on the server, and how many third parties are allowed onto the page.<\/p>
We set a performance budget at the start and check against it as we go, so the site launches fast rather than being optimised back to fast afterwards.<\/p>
You get the repository in your own account, the credentials, and documentation covering setup, deployment and any scheduled jobs \u2014 enough that another competent developer could take it over without calling us.<\/p>
Most clients stay on a retainer for ongoing work, but that is a choice rather than a lock-in. A site you cannot leave is a site you are renting.<\/p>","content_2":"Design and build | CMS your team can use | Integrations | Testing across devices | Analytics and monitoring | Documented handover"},{"id":2,"main_image":null,"name":"E-commerce Development","slug":"e-commerce-development","meta_title":"E-commerce Development \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"Online stores built to sell: fast, measurable, and straightforward for your team to run every day.","quote":null,"lead":"Online stores built to sell: fast, measurable, and straightforward for your team to run every day.","type":1,"type_name":"Fejleszt\u00e9s","content":"
Most stores lose their sales in the last few steps. We design the checkout first \u2014 costs shown early, guest purchase allowed, the fewest fields that still let you fulfil the order \u2014 and build the storefront around it.<\/p>
Product data, stock, shipping rules and tax get modelled properly at the start, because retrofitting them later is where e-commerce projects go wrong.<\/p>
Your team has to add products, run promotions and process orders without calling a developer. The admin experience gets as much attention as the shop front.<\/p>
We instrument each step of the funnel so you can see where people leave, rather than only knowing that the overall conversion rate moved.<\/p>
Products, variants, stock, shipping rules and tax get designed at the start, because retrofitting them is where e-commerce projects go wrong. A variant structure that cannot express your actual range costs you every day it exists.<\/p>
We work from your real data rather than a sample, including the awkward products \u2014 the bundle, the made-to-order item, the one with six options that interact.<\/p>
Existing stores arrive with order history, customer accounts, reviews and a lot of URLs that earn traffic. All of it has to move, and the URLs have to redirect to the closest equivalent rather than to the homepage.<\/p>
We test the redirect map against the real list of old addresses before launch. Getting this wrong is the most common cause of a store's traffic collapsing after a replatform.<\/p>
Your team adds products, runs promotions, fixes an address and refunds an order without calling a developer. The admin gets as much attention as the storefront, because that is where the hours actually go.<\/p>
We build the reports the people running the shop asked for, not the ones the platform ships with.<\/p>
Every checkout step is instrumented as its own event, and validation errors are recorded with counts. A rule quietly rejecting a legitimate postcode format can cost a percent of revenue for years without anyone noticing.<\/p>
You get a funnel you can read by device, because desktop and mobile usually fail in different places and a blended number hides whichever is worse.<\/p>","content_2":"Storefront and checkout | Product and stock modelling | Payment and shipping setup | Admin your team can run | Funnel analytics | Launch and migration"},{"id":3,"main_image":null,"name":"WordPress Development","slug":"wordpress-development","meta_title":"WordPress Development \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"Custom WordPress builds and themes made to your design \u2014 not a marketplace template \u2014 fast, secure, and straightforward for your team to edit.","quote":null,"lead":"Custom WordPress builds and themes made to your design \u2014 not a marketplace template \u2014 fast, secure, and straightforward for your team to edit.","type":1,"type_name":"Fejleszt\u00e9s","content":"
We build the theme from your design, so the site looks like your brand rather than like everyone else who bought the same package. The editor is configured around the blocks your content actually needs.<\/p>
Every plugin is a dependency and a security surface. We use as few as the job genuinely requires, and build the rest properly, which keeps the site fast and the maintenance predictable.<\/p>
When your content is mostly pages and posts, your team publishes often, and you want a CMS they already know. When the data stops looking like articles, we will tell you a custom build is the better value.<\/p>
We build the theme from the design rather than buying one and bending it, so the site looks like your brand instead of like everyone else who bought the same package.<\/p>
The block editor is configured around the content you actually publish, with the patterns your team needs and the ones they do not removed. An editor with fifty irrelevant blocks is an editor nobody uses correctly.<\/p>
Every plugin is a dependency, a performance cost and a security surface. Sites that accumulate twenty of them reach a point where nobody dares run an update, and deferred updates are how a cheap start becomes an expensive middle.<\/p>
We use the few that genuinely earn their place and build the rest properly. The result is a site that can be updated on a Tuesday without anyone holding their breath.<\/p>
Most slow WordPress sites are slow for the same handful of reasons: oversized images, a page builder shipping CSS for components the page does not use, render-blocking fonts, and a stack of marketing scripts nobody has audited.<\/p>
We fix the causes rather than layering a caching plugin over them, because caching hides a slow site from some visitors rather than making it fast.<\/p>
Hardened configuration, restricted file permissions, enforced strong authentication, and a maintenance plan that keeps core, themes and plugins current. Backups that are tested by actually restoring one, not merely scheduled.<\/p>
Most compromised WordPress sites are not targeted. They are found by automation looking for a known vulnerability in something two versions out of date.<\/p>","content_2":"Custom theme from your design | Block editor configured | Minimal plugin footprint | Performance tuning | Security hardening | Editor training"},{"id":4,"main_image":null,"name":"AI Workflow & Automation","slug":"ai-workflow-automation","meta_title":"AI Workflow & Automation \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"We map the repetitive work in your business and automate it \u2014 AI-assisted workflows, integrations between the tools you already run, and agents that handle the parts nobody should be doing by hand.","quote":null,"lead":"We map the repetitive work in your business and automate it \u2014 AI-assisted workflows, integrations between the tools you already run, and agents that handle the parts nobody should be doing by hand.","type":1,"type_name":"Fejleszt\u00e9s","content":"
We look for the places where somebody reads one screen and types into another, or where a spreadsheet exists purely to reconcile two systems. Those are integrations that have not been built yet.<\/p>
The value is rarely in something impressive. It is in summarising enquiries, extracting structured data from documents, routing requests and drafting first-pass replies.<\/p>
We automate one direction at a time, log everything, and keep a human reviewing output until it is boringly reliable. Automating a broken process only produces wrong answers faster.<\/p>
A measured before-and-after, the automation itself, and documentation so your team understands what it does and how to stop it.<\/p>
We look for the places where someone reads one screen and types into another, for spreadsheets that exist only to reconcile two systems, and for the task that takes a full day at every month end. Each one is an integration nobody has built yet.<\/p>
The valuable candidates are rarely impressive. Summarising enquiries, extracting structured data from documents, routing requests, drafting a first reply \u2014 dull work, done constantly, by people who should be doing something else.<\/p>
Half the steps in most manual processes exist because of a constraint that disappeared years ago. Automating them faithfully preserves that constraint permanently, in code, where it is harder to see and harder to remove.<\/p>
So the process gets written down and cut back first, agreed with the people who actually do it. Often the simplification alone recovers most of the time and the automation becomes optional.<\/p>
We automate one direction at a time, log every action, and keep a person approving output until it is boringly reliable. Where a wrong answer would reach a customer, a regulator or an account, the person stays permanently.<\/p>
Every automation keeps a manual path that still works, and a documented way to switch it off. An automation nobody can stop is a liability.<\/p>
We measure the task before we touch it \u2014 hours, error rate, turnaround \u2014 and again afterwards. Teams that cannot state the current cost of a task cannot tell whether automating it worked, which is how organisations end up maintaining automations that save nothing.<\/p>
You get the numbers, the automation, and documentation clear enough that your own team understands what it does.<\/p>","content_2":"Process audit | Automation build | Integrations | Human review step | Before-and-after measurement | Documentation and handover"},{"id":5,"main_image":null,"name":"Search Engine Optimisation","slug":"search-engine-optimisation","meta_title":"Search Engine Optimisation \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"Technical and on-page optimisation so the right people find the site, backed by measurement rather than guesswork.","quote":null,"lead":"Technical and on-page optimisation so the right people find the site, backed by measurement rather than guesswork.","type":1,"type_name":"Fejleszt\u00e9s","content":"
Crawlability, indexation, site structure, internal linking, page speed and structured data. Content cannot rank if the foundation stops search engines reading it properly.<\/p>
We work from the queries people actually use rather than a keyword list bought in bulk, and structure pages so each one answers a real question completely.<\/p>
Most sustained gains come from improving pages that already almost work. We watch what ranks just off the first page and fix those first, because they are the cheapest wins available.<\/p>
Crawlability, indexation, site structure, internal linking, page speed and structured data. Content cannot rank if the foundation stops a search engine reading it properly, and a surprising number of sites are quietly blocking themselves.<\/p>
The most common finding is the most embarrassing one: a staging noindex left in place at launch, sometimes for years.<\/p>
We work from the questions people actually type and ask, not a keyword list bought in bulk. Then each page is structured to answer one question completely rather than to mention a term repeatedly.<\/p>
Search increasingly rewards a page that finishes the job. Adding the section a reader would obviously want next is usually worth more than publishing another article on an adjacent topic.<\/p>
A growing share of searches now end in a summary rather than a click, which changes what a page has to do. Clear factual statements, direct answers near the top, real structure, and structured data all make a page easier for a model to quote accurately.<\/p>
We build sites with a server-rendered copy of their content and a machine-readable index, because most AI crawlers do not run JavaScript and read nothing at all otherwise.<\/p>
Indexation and coverage first, because a page that is not indexed cannot rank. Then impressions and position for the queries that matter, then clicks, then enquiries.<\/p>
We flag the pages sitting between position eight and twenty every month, because improving one of those costs a fraction of creating a new page and usually earns more.<\/p>","content_2":"Technical audit | Site structure and internal linking | Content plan from real queries | Structured data | Search Console setup | Monthly reporting"},{"id":6,"main_image":null,"name":"IT Consulting","slug":"it-consulting","meta_title":"IT Consulting \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"An independent read on your stack, your options and the trade-offs, before you commit budget to a direction.","quote":null,"lead":"An independent read on your stack, your options and the trade-offs, before you commit budget to a direction.","type":1,"type_name":"Fejleszt\u00e9s","content":"
Deciding whether to rebuild or redesign. Choosing between platforms. Working out whether a proposal you have been given is reasonable. Situations where the expensive mistake is made before any code is written.<\/p>
We audit what exists, talk to the people who run it, and write down the options with their real costs and risks \u2014 including the option of doing nothing.<\/p>
The recommendation is not a sales pitch for our own services. Sometimes the honest answer is that what you have is fine, or that another supplier is a better fit.<\/p>
Whether to rebuild or redesign. Which platform to commit to. Whether a proposal someone has been given is reasonable. Whether an existing supplier is delivering what they are charging for.<\/p>
These are the decisions where the expensive mistake is made before any code is written, which is exactly why an independent read is worth buying.<\/p>
We audit what exists, read the code where there is code, and talk to the people who actually run the thing rather than only the people who commissioned it. The gap between those two accounts is usually where the problem is.<\/p>
Then we write the options down with their real costs, their risks and their timelines \u2014 including the option of doing nothing, which is more often right than anyone selling you something will say.<\/p>
We will tell you what a proposal has left out, what is priced optimistically, and which assumptions will move the number later. Not to disqualify a supplier, but so you can ask them the right questions.<\/p>
Frequently the honest verdict is that the quote is fair and the concern is elsewhere \u2014 in the scope, or in who owns the result.<\/p>
The recommendation is not a pitch for our own services. Sometimes the answer is that what you have is fine and needs maintenance rather than replacement, and sometimes it is that another supplier fits better than we do.<\/p>
A consultant whose advice always concludes in their own favour is not being paid for advice.<\/p>","content_2":"Audit of the current stack | Options with real costs | Risk assessment | Written recommendation | Supplier review if needed | A decision you can defend"},{"id":12,"main_image":null,"name":"Forward Deployed Engineer (FDE)","slug":"forward-deployed-engineer","meta_title":"Forward Deployed Engineer (FDE) \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"An engineer from our team embedded in yours \u2014 working in your codebase, your tools and your meetings to ship the integrations, internal tools and AI workflows your roadmap keeps postponing.","quote":null,"lead":"An engineer from our team embedded in yours \u2014 working in your codebase, your tools and your meetings to ship the integrations, internal tools and AI workflows your roadmap keeps postponing.","type":1,"type_name":"Fejleszt\u00e9s","content":"
An engineer who works inside your organisation rather than across the table from it. They join your stand-ups, work in your repositories and tools, and sit close to the people whose problems they are solving \u2014 on site or remote, whichever the work needs.<\/p>
The role comes from companies that deploy complex software into large organisations, where the hardest part is rarely the code. It is understanding the workflow, the data and the constraints well enough to build the right thing, and that understanding comes from being there.<\/p>
When the problem sits between your systems rather than inside one of them: integrations, internal tools, data pipelines, or AI workflows that have to fit how your people actually work.<\/p>
When your team knows the domain but not the technology, or knows the technology but has no capacity left. And when the usual project \u2014 scope, estimate, hand over \u2014 keeps failing because the requirements only become clear once someone is building.<\/p>
A project delivers a defined thing and ends. An engagement like this works against a problem, and the definition sharpens as the work proceeds. You see working software every week, in your own environment, and priorities can move when the evidence says they should.<\/p>
It starts with a short discovery inside your environment: who does the work today, where the data lives, and what breaks. Together we pick the first problem worth solving and agree how we will know it is solved.<\/p>
From there the engineer ships in small increments inside your stack, pairing with your people as they go \u2014 so what gets learned stays with your team rather than leaving with ours.<\/p>
Your repositories, your cloud, your security policies and your review process. Access is scoped to what the work needs and removed when it ends, and nothing is built in a private sandbox and thrown over the wall.<\/p>
Changes go through the same pull requests and the same checks as your own engineers' work, which is how they stay maintainable after we have gone.<\/p>
An engagement ends with your team able to run, change and extend what was built: documented, tested, and walked through with the people who will own it.<\/p>
The aim is that you do not need us for the next one \u2014 and that you would rather have us anyway.<\/p>","content_2":"An engineer embedded in your team | Discovery in your own environment | Working software every week | Integrations and internal tools | AI workflows in production | Documentation and handover"},{"id":13,"main_image":null,"name":"AI Visibility Audit (GEO)","slug":"ai-visibility-geo-audit","meta_title":"AI Visibility Audit (GEO) \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"An audit of how AI answers see your business, and a prioritised list of what to fix, with every finding sourced and dated.","quote":"What we measured. What we could not. What to fix.","lead":"An audit of how AI answers see your business, and a prioritised list of what to fix, with every finding sourced and dated.","type":1,"type_name":"Fejleszt\u00e9s","content":"
Generative engine optimisation, or GEO, is the work of making a business easy for AI answer engines to read, understand and describe correctly. Much of it is unglamorous: crawler rules, markup, and business details that agree with each other. The audit tells you which of it you actually need.<\/p>
It looks at three things: what your site lets AI crawlers read, whether your details match everywhere they appear, and who gets named when a buyer asks the questions you would want to be the answer to.<\/p>
When your buyers might ask an assistant before they ask a search engine, and you want to know what it can say about you. When a competitor gets named for questions you expected to own, and nobody can tell you why.<\/p>
When it is not: if the site is about to be rebuilt, or you cannot yet say which market and services you want to be known for. The audit measures a site against a market. Without both, the honest answer is to wait.<\/p>
An SEO audit asks whether search engines can crawl, index and rank your pages. This one asks whether AI crawlers can read them, whether your details agree everywhere, and who gets named when a buyer asks a specific question. The technical ground overlaps. The questions do not.<\/p>
The reporting differs too. There is no score out of a hundred. Every finding carries its source and its date, and anything nobody measured is labelled as such.<\/p>
It starts with up to 30 questions a real buyer would ask, in one language and one market, grouped by intent: recommendation, comparison, how to choose, and your brand by name. You approve the list before anything runs. Brand questions are there because an answer can describe you wrongly as easily as it can leave you out.<\/p>
For every prompt we record who the web search results name, and how you compare with up to three competitors you choose or we propose. That is labelled a proxy throughout. It shows who the open web points to for the question, not what any AI engine cited, and the report never presents it as more.<\/p>
The live site, read the way a crawler reads it. The rules robots.txt sets for GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended and other AI crawlers. Whether llms.txt exists, what the sitemap lists, whether the structured data matches what the page actually says, and whether key pages show their text without JavaScript.<\/p>
That last check is the quiet one. A crawler that does not run JavaScript sees only what the server sends, so a page that builds its text in the browser can look empty to it. We also check that your name, address, phone and profiles agree across the site and public listings.<\/p>
Our tools cannot query ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity or Google AI Overviews directly. So by default the audit comes with a prompt sheet: the same buyer questions, set out for you to run on your own accounts, with space to record each answer and its date. Or we run it for you: we put those same prompts to ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews ourselves, one dated run, logged as measured manually, for \u20ac299 net + VAT.<\/p>
Whatever you send back goes into the report as answered, with its date. Any engine nobody ran is marked \u201cnot measured\u201d rather than estimated. Answers also vary from one run to the next, so every result is a snapshot, not a verdict. A gap with a label on it is more use than a number nobody can check.<\/p>
The audit costs \u20ac500 net + VAT. Within two weeks of a completed intake, a branded PDF. A readiness scorecard: each check pass, fail or not present, with its URL and date. A lost-prompt table: the question, who gets named instead, the likely reason, the fix. A fix list ranked High, Medium and Low, each marked on-site or off-site. Then a walkthrough call.<\/p>
Reviews, listings and press are off-site: yours to act on, with our advice. If we built your site or look after it on a care plan, we can make the on-site fixes, staging first; otherwise the list is written for your developer. About 14 days after the fixes go live, we rerun the same prompts and checks and send a short before-and-after note.<\/p>","content_2":"A prompt set you approve | AI-readiness scorecard with sources | Business details checked across listings | Who gets named instead, and why | Fix list ranked High to Low | Walkthrough call and one recheck"}],"branding":[{"id":7,"main_image":null,"name":"Brand Identity","slug":"brand-identity","meta_title":"Brand Identity \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"A complete visual language \u2014 type, colour, imagery and tone \u2014 documented so it stays consistent as you grow.","quote":null,"lead":"A complete visual language \u2014 type, colour, imagery and tone \u2014 documented so it stays consistent as you grow.","type":2,"type_name":"Branding","content":"
People recognise colour, type, spacing and photographic treatment long before they recognise a mark. An identity that only defines the logo leaves every later decision to whoever happens to be making the next asset.<\/p>
The mark and its variants, a type scale, a palette with defined roles, photographic direction, and rules for how it all behaves together \u2014 written down rather than held in someone's head.<\/p>
The exclusions save the most arguments later. We document what the brand does not do as carefully as what it does.<\/p>
Colour first, at a distance. Then typography, which carries more personality than most clients expect. Then the treatment of imagery. The logo comes fourth and often barely registers.<\/p>
An identity defined only by a mark leaves every later decision to whoever makes the next asset, and within a year the brand is an average of six people's taste.<\/p>
A brand that looks precise and writes like a press release is two brands. Words are the part customers spend the most time with and the part most often left undefined.<\/p>
We document it the way we document colour: a few principles, words you use and words you avoid, and three before-and-after rewrites of your own copy. Examples teach faster than adjectives.<\/p>
An identity is tested by its worst cases: reversed out of a photograph, embroidered at two centimetres, sitting beside five competitors on a partner's page, rendered as a sixteen-pixel favicon.<\/p>
We specify those explicitly \u2014 minimum sizes, one-colour and reversed variants, clear space, and what to do when the background is uncontrolled.<\/p>
Short, practical and full of examples, including what not to do. A hundred-page document nobody reads protects nothing.<\/p>
You get the working files, every format you will realistically need, and a session with whoever will be applying it.<\/p>","content_2":"Logo and variants | Type scale | Colour palette with roles | Photography direction | Tone of voice | Written guidelines"},{"id":8,"main_image":null,"name":"Web Design","slug":"web-design","meta_title":"Web Design \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"Interface design grounded in structure and hierarchy: considered typography, spacing and motion across every breakpoint.","quote":null,"lead":"Interface design grounded in structure and hierarchy: considered typography, spacing and motion across every breakpoint.","type":2,"type_name":"Branding","content":"
We agree the information architecture and the wireframes before anything gets styled. It keeps the conversation about whether the thing works rather than what colour it is.<\/p>
Mobile-first, because a narrow screen forces you to decide what genuinely matters. The wide layout is then its own considered design, not the narrow one stretched.<\/p>
You get components and rules, not a folder of unrelated screens, so new pages inherit the decisions instead of re-litigating them.<\/p>
We agree the information architecture and the wireframes before anything is styled. It keeps the conversation about whether the thing works rather than what colour it is, and it is far cheaper to move a section in a wireframe than in a build.<\/p>
The order of the argument is the design decision everything else follows from.<\/p>
Mobile-first, because a narrow column forces you to decide what genuinely matters. The wide layout is then its own considered design rather than the narrow one stretched.<\/p>
Every interactive element is designed for a finger as well as a cursor: real hit areas, no meaning carried only by hover, feedback that appears where the hand is not covering.<\/p>
Movement should explain something \u2014 where a panel came from, that an action registered, what changed. Decoration that delays a person from reading is a cost, not a flourish.<\/p>
Everything respects reduced-motion preferences, because for some people unnecessary animation is not an annoyance but a symptom trigger.<\/p>
You get components and rules rather than a folder of unrelated screens, with every state drawn: default, hover, focus, active, disabled, loading, error and empty.<\/p>
The empty and error states are where most handovers are silent, and where most products end up looking unfinished.<\/p>","content_2":"Information architecture | Wireframes | Full design at every breakpoint | Component library | Interaction and motion | Developer handover"},{"id":9,"main_image":null,"name":"Logo Design","slug":"logo-design","meta_title":"Logo Design \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"A mark that works everywhere it needs to \u2014 at any size, in one colour, on screen and in print.","quote":null,"lead":"A mark that works everywhere it needs to \u2014 at any size, in one colour, on screen and in print.","type":2,"type_name":"Branding","content":"
A logo has to hold up at favicon size, embroidered on a shirt, and reversed out of a photograph. We design for the hardest of those cases rather than the prettiest.<\/p>
Research, then broad exploration, then a small number of serious directions developed properly. We would rather show three considered routes than twenty thumbnails.<\/p>
Every format and variant you will realistically need, with clear guidance on minimum sizes, spacing and the treatments to avoid.<\/p>
A mark has to survive a favicon, an embroidered shirt, a single colour, and being reversed out of a photograph. We design for those rather than for the presentation slide, because the presentation is the one place it will always look good.<\/p>
Fine detail is the usual casualty. If it disappears at sixteen pixels, it is decoration rather than identity.<\/p>
Research first \u2014 your market, your competitors, and where you need to sit relative to them. Then broad exploration on paper, then a small number of serious directions developed properly.<\/p>
We would rather show three considered routes than twenty thumbnails. Twenty thumbnails is a way of transferring the decision to you.<\/p>
Vector source files, and exports in every format you will realistically need: full colour, one colour, reversed, horizontal and stacked lockups, plus favicon and app icon sizes.<\/p>
Alongside them, clear guidance on minimum sizes, clear space and the treatments to avoid \u2014 the part that keeps the mark intact once other people start using it.<\/p>","content_2":"Research and exploration | Three developed directions | Final mark and variants | Every file format | Usage guidance | Source files"},{"id":10,"main_image":null,"name":"Business Card Design","slug":"business-card-design","meta_title":"Business Card Design \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"Print-ready cards designed as part of a wider identity, not as an afterthought.","quote":null,"lead":"Print-ready cards designed as part of a wider identity, not as an afterthought.","type":2,"type_name":"Branding","content":"
A card is usually the first physical thing anyone holds from your brand. It should use the same type, spacing and palette as everything else rather than being designed in isolation.<\/p>
Bleed, safe margins, colour profile and stock chosen deliberately, so what arrives from the printer matches what you approved.<\/p>
A card is usually the first physical thing anyone holds from your brand. It should use the same type, spacing and palette as everything else rather than being designed in isolation months later.<\/p>
Where an identity already exists, the card falls out of it quickly. Where it does not, the card is a poor place to invent one.<\/p>
Bleed, safe margins, colour profile and stock chosen deliberately, with artwork prepared to the printer's actual specification rather than a generic template.<\/p>
Screens are backlit and card stock is not. A colour that sings on a monitor can arrive muddy, so we approve a proof on the real stock before the run.<\/p>","content_2":"Design in your identity | Print-ready artwork | Stock and finish advice | Printer liaison | Proof approval | Source files"},{"id":11,"main_image":null,"name":"Merch Design & Production","slug":"merch-design","meta_title":"Merch Design & Production \u2014 Creative Agent","og_image":null,"meta_description":"Apparel, print and promotional items designed in-house, with production and suppliers managed end to end so you get finished goods, not artwork files.","quote":null,"lead":"Apparel, print and promotional items designed in-house, with production and suppliers managed end to end so you get finished goods, not artwork files.","type":2,"type_name":"Branding","content":"
The test is whether someone would choose the item if it had no logo on it. A small mark on a genuinely good piece outperforms a large mark on a cheap one every time.<\/p>
Blanks, print method, placement and sizing across the run all decide whether it survives washing and looks like the sample. We handle the suppliers and the quality control.<\/p>
Finished goods delivered, not a folder of print-ready files and a list of printers to ring.<\/p>
Would someone choose this item if it had no logo on it? If yes, the mark gets carried into the world for years. If no, it goes in a drawer and you have paid to be associated with something disappointing.<\/p>
A small mark on a genuinely good product outperforms a large mark on a cheap one every time. Fewer and better is nearly always the right call.<\/p>
The blank, first: the same print reads premium on a heavyweight garment and disposable on a thin one, and the cost difference is smaller than people expect.<\/p>
Then the method. Screen printing for flat colour at volume, embroidery for durability at the cost of fine detail, DTG for complexity. Choosing before the artwork is finalised saves redrawing it.<\/p>
Then placement across the size run, which is the most common reason a batch looks amateur despite good artwork.<\/p>
Decide who gets these, when, and how they physically reach them before the order is placed. That decision changes the quantity, the size split and often the item itself.<\/p>
Anything with sizing needs a real size curve. Getting it wrong leaves you with forty extra-smalls and no larges, which is the same as having ordered forty fewer.<\/p>","content_2":"Design and artwork | Blank and stock selection | Print method advice | Supplier management | Sample approval | Delivered goods"}]}