No client brief started Move It. No client brief started Ugly Beauty either. I made both of them up, then designed them like they were real.
That probably sounds like a strange way to spend a weekend. Here's why I do it anyway.
The problem with only showing client work
Client work is the whole point of this business, and most of what's in my portfolio comes from real projects with real people. But client work comes with real constraints too. Maybe a stakeholder wants the logo bigger, or a launch date moves up and a feature gets cut before it's ready. Sometimes the brief itself boxes in a decision I'd have made differently if I'd had more room to think. None of that is a complaint. It's just how the work actually happens.
Concept work skips all of it. No brief. No stakeholder. Just whatever deadline I bother setting for myself, if I set one at all. Every decision on the page is mine, which also means I can't blame a client if something doesn't work. That's the whole appeal.
Move It: designing for the person who's never done this before
Move It is a brand concept for a boutique fitness studio, Pilates, reformer, sculpt, recovery, yoga, all under one roof. The obvious homepage is a class list. Times, names, book now. I've seen that page a hundred times and it assumes something: that whoever's looking already knows what a reformer class involves and whether they're ready for it.
I didn't want to assume that. So the homepage leads with an experience-level picker instead, little to no experience, some experience, lots of experience, each one pointing to a different starting point. A regular and a total beginner land on different versions of the same site instead of staring down the same wall of jargon.
Membership tiers and single drop-in classes get equal visual weight too. Committing to a monthly plan and trying one class on a whim are two completely different decisions, and the site treats them that way instead of steering everyone toward the bigger commitment by default.
Ugly Beauty: making the visuals match the claim
Ugly Beauty started from one line: beauty isn't pretty, makeup made to be ruined. Most beauty brand sites, if I'm honest, undercut a line like that immediately. The copy talks about rejecting the polished standard, then the product photography is the same clean flatlay every other beauty site uses. Perfect lighting. Perfect skin. Nothing "ugly" about it anywhere.
If the positioning is going to mean anything, the visuals have to actually commit to it. So the product grid uses raw, mid-wear makeup photography instead, a smudged lip, worn eye makeup, a flushed cheek. Closer to what the product looks like a few hours after it goes on than what it looks like in a studio shot five minutes after application. The site only works if it's willing to look a little messy on purpose.
What this actually proves
I'm not pretending concept work is the same as shipping a real site for a real client, it isn't. There's no user testing. No analytics. No actual proof any of these decisions would hold up once real traffic hits them.
What it does prove is how I think before a client's constraints ever enter the picture. Give me an idea, and I'll figure out the one decision that actually matters and build around it, whether that's an experience-level picker or a deliberately unpolished photo grid. That's the same instinct I bring to client work, just without anything getting in the way of seeing it through.
If you've got an idea sitting somewhere, half-formed or fully scoped, that's usually a good place to start a conversation.