Lambert Lighting

Lambert makes architectural lighting in Rhode Island. I rebuilt …

+ … the rest of the case study, over 1,200 words +

` held no words until JavaScript ran. ![Lambert Lighting case study hero at 1440 pixels wide, identical in the static HTML reference and the Next.js build.]() The Lambert case study at 1440 px, captured at the migration on 3 October 2026 (its copy has been rewritten since). Below the header, the captures from the static prototype and the Next.js build are the same file, so there is nothing to compare by eye. The original stylesheet, fonts and images were reused unchanged. How it was done ## How the move was checked. Before any code moved, the approved reference was fingerprinted. Fifty-four source files are hashed, and the production build still refuses to run if one of them changes. If the approved design is edited by accident, the build stops. The port reused files rather than rewriting them. Search infrastructure was added underneath, and then every page was captured in pairs, from the same browser at the same viewport, and compared. The written record shipped with the code. The migration sequence 1. **Freeze the reference** Hash every approved source file 2. **Port without restyling** Reuse CSS, fonts, images and scripts as they are 3. **Add what search needs** Clean URLs, metadata, structured data, sitemap, real 404s 4. **Capture in pairs** Same browser and viewport, four widths, moving layers masked 5. **Measure every difference** Per-pair pixel deltas saved beside the screenshots 6. **Ship with the record** A report listing each difference and each untested area Search ## What crawlers receive now. Visitors see the same site. The HTML a crawler receives on the first request is completely different. What a search engine receives, now and before | Signal | Next.js build | Static prototype | | --- | --- | --- | | Case study address | A clean path per case study, such as /work/lambert | Was project.html?p=lambert | | First response | The whole page, rendered on the server and readable without JavaScript | Was an empty shell | | Unknown project | A real 404 status with a readable page | Was a script message | | Titles and descriptions | Per route in the first HTML, with canonical and social cards | Was set by script, no description | | Structured data | WebSite, Person, CreativeWork, and Article when published | Was none | | Sitemap and robots.txt | Generated from the same project data as the pages | Was none | | Feed | RSS, published articles only | Was none | | Unpublished sample | noindex, and kept out of the sitemap and feed | Was an ordinary page | The prototype was a local design reference, not the public site, so launch needed no redirects. On a live site this table becomes the redirect map: every old address, its new home and a permanent redirect between them. Calls I made ## Four decisions during the move. ### Reuse the original files Chose The original image files and stylesheet, served as they were. Instead of Framework image optimisation and a rewritten stylesheet at launch. Trade-off Some optimisation waited for a later, separately checked change, in exchange for zero crop or rendering drift on day one. ### Report every difference Chose Report the four imperfect pairs with their exact deltas. Instead of Raising the tolerance until every pair passed. Trade-off The headline is 208 of 212 instead of 212, and anyone can check the record. ### Mask only the moving layers Chose Mask the particle field, cursor and clocks, and nothing else. Instead of Masking any region that happened to differ. Trade-off Animation cannot be pixel-compared, so it was checked separately by behaviour and frame timing. ### Leave an unreproducible issue open Chose Record a first-load text size variation in the original that twelve fresh test runs could not reproduce. Instead of Shipping a speculative runtime fix. Trade-off One open review item in the report instead of new code with unknown side effects. In-house · Craft CMS to Webflow ## Copper CRM, 200+ pages. I led SEO for Copper CRM’s move of its 200+ page marketing site from Craft CMS to Webflow, working with the in-house team. My part was the redirect and URL map, the content migration and the launch SEO QA. That was a live site with existing search history, where a migration carries real risk: every old address needs a new home, and every redirect has to work on launch day. Copper’s working files stay with Copper, so the evidence on this page comes from a site I own. Result ## Where it stands now. The Next.js build went live in October 2026 and is the site you are reading. Everything added since has been built on it. Shipped - Server-rendered pages at clean /work/ addresses - Per-page titles, canonicals and social cards - Structured data, sitemap, robots.txt and RSS - Real 404s for unknown projects and articles - Build checks that fail on reference drift Not claimed Safari, physical phones and screen readers were outside this test pass. There are no traffic or ranking figures, because the prototype had no search history to compare against. Moving particles were checked by behaviour, not pixels. For a client migration The same method carries over: fingerprint the current site, map every URL, port without redesigning, capture pairs, and launch with a written record of what changed and what was not tested. ## Related work [Same discipline, larger system **Jardine Studio** Jardine Studio checks for search regressions on every pull request.]() [In the comparison above **Lambert Lighting** The client site used as the before-and-after example.]() [All projects ↗]()