Quality is moving.Independence is not settled.

The Main Problem

The team can move the project forward, but they still need Arseni when the work needs taste, prioritization, or a clean client-facing frame. That is the part to improve. Not another system for its own sake. The goal is simpler: before anything reaches David, the team should already know what they recommend, why, and what they want from the client.

Creative Direction

This is the strongest part of the project, but it still depends too much on Arseni's eye. The white footer is the clean example. The team had options, but Arseni was the one who clearly saw which direction felt lighter and more correct for David.

The fix is to make Ivan state the creative argument before showing options. Not just “here are two footers.” More like: “I recommend the white footer because the site should feel quieter, lighter, and image-led. The dark footer feels heavier and competes with the work.” That forces judgment, not just production.

Art Direction

Ivan is doing real art-direction work. He looked at the old site, David's references, title videos, project grids, project-page structure, about page, and image behavior. That is good. Where it can improve is the separation between “what the client asked for” and “what the site needs.” A stronger art director says: David asked for X, but the site will be better if we do Y.

Design Execution

The design execution is decent. The site has a direction. It is not generic. It feels like a real visual world. The weakness is the last fifteen percent: footer weight, image loading, empty spaces, rollovers, mobile behavior, optional project descriptions, phone clickability. These are small details, but they are exactly what makes a preview feel finished.

The improvement is a pre-client taste pass. Before Mira sends anything, Ivan should do one pass with only these questions: does anything feel heavy, repeated, unfinished, too technical, too empty, too loud, too slow, or accidental?

Client Communication

Mira did well. She shared the preview, framed it as not final, explained rollovers, asked for feedback, and offered the footer option. David responded positively and gave a clear preference. That is a good client loop.

What can improve is the framing. Mira should not only ask “what do you think?” She should guide the client's eye: “We are showing you the Projects section first because this is the main behavior pattern for the site. Please focus on rollover feel, project grid rhythm, and footer direction. Some content and final polish are still in progress.” That makes the client judge the right thing.

Financial Side

Financially, this looks healthy but slightly soft. Deposit is paid, there is a balance/invoice loop, and the client is engaged. The risk is not willingness. The risk is scope softness. Friendly relationship projects can quietly become free extra rounds.

The fix is not to become rigid. It is to attach billing to milestones: design approved, coded preview shown, final development/content integration next, balance invoice before launch or before final CMS/live push. Mira should own that language, not Arseni.

QA

QA is the weakest non-system part. Mujtaba caught useful issues, which is good, but they were caught close to preview time. That creates a feeling that the team is discovering problems while the client is already watching.

The improvement is simple: no preview link goes to the client until one person checks it like a client. Desktop, mobile, rollovers, loading, footer links, phone click, empty spaces, obvious broken media. This is a fifteen-minute ritual, not a big process.

Code / Prototype

This is where Arseni got pulled in too much. The team and Codex were dealing with videos, local files, Dropbox, staging, thumbnails, and loading. Some of this is technical friction, but some is decision friction: should project cards use huge videos, short videos, thumbnails, preload, lazy load, fallback images?

For future similar sites, decide this upfront. Portfolio grids should not depend on giant videos loading immediately. They need lightweight thumbnails first, then video behavior only when useful. That single rule would have prevented a lot of drag.

Team Independence

The team is partially independent. They can move. They can communicate. Ivan can produce. Mira can handle David. Mujtaba can catch issues. But the project still needs Arseni's taste and technical steering at important points.

The improvement is not for Arseni to disappear. It is for Arseni's involvement to move earlier and become smaller: creative thesis at the start, one serious preview in the middle, and one final taste pass before client or launch. Everything else should be team-owned.