A portfolio shouldn't feel like a list of links. It should feel like a place.

That's what I was chasing with Random — my new portfolio/showcase site built around visual identity and a Web3-leaning aesthetic. Instead of the usual grid-of-projects layout, I wanted something closer to a brand experience: custom typography and color systems, motion that actually means something, and a layout that feels alive rather than static.

Built with React 18 and Vite for speed, React-Bootstrap for the responsive structure, and Framer Motion doing most of the heavy lifting on the "living brand" feeling — timed transitions, scroll-triggered reveals, that kind of thing.

The technical piece I'm most interested in right now is the Web3 layer. Wallet connect is wired in, and an NFT gallery is next — which meant thinking early about how a portfolio site handles blockchain state without turning into a mess of edge cases (disconnected wallets, chain mismatches, empty states). Still iterating on that part.

The harder problem, honestly, wasn't the code — it was resisting the urge to over-animate. Motion is easy to add and easy to overdo. Getting it to feel intentional instead of decorative took more restraint than skill. 🎨

I'm drawn to work that sits right at the design/dev line — where a technical decision is also a brand decision. If you build in that space too, I'd love to hear how you think about that balance.

What's your rule of thumb for knowing when motion design has gone too far?

Project :

Live demo: https://randoom-portfolio.vercel.app

Case study: https://www.behance.net/gallery/249325831/RANDOOM-Visual-Identity-Web3-Experience

Code: https://github.com/Hi-Webinator/RANDOOM