Matviy is an excellent specialist and a very pleasant person to communicate with. The second stage of the project was completed with high quality and within the agreed deadlines. Throughout the work, he was always in touch, promptly answering questions, explaining technical details thoroughly, and offering solutions for complex tasks. I would like to particularly note his openness to feedback and willingness for constructive dialogue. All requests and edits were discussed without any issues, and during the work, there was a noticeable interest in achieving a quality result rather than just formally completing the task. We are satisfied with the collaboration. We continue to work on the next stages of the project and I can recommend Matviy as a responsible and competent developer.
Incredibly satisfied with the collaboration! The website was created exactly according to the specifications. Special respect for the speed of work, professional approach, and humanity in communication. A true master of their craft, to whom you can confidently entrust a project of any complexity. I recommend 100%!.
5.0
We ordered a website audit and were satisfied with the result. The specialist thoroughly analyzed all technical aspects of the resource, checked its visual component, functionality, and usability. During the audit, the strengths of the site were clearly identified, as well as weaknesses, and recommendations for their elimination were provided. The work was done professionally, clearly, and with attention to detail. We recommend it to those who want to receive an objective assessment of their website and improve its effectiveness.
Looking for a top video editor for CS2/IEM: local memes, FX, sounds, transitions, YouTube dynamics
200 USD
Great job! Everything went well, the revisions were done quickly and successfully. The person paid close attention to all requests, and I was satisfied with the result. It was cool and interesting to work together, I recommend!
5.0
Maria is a professional who is pleasant to work with. Maria created two promotional videos with motion design, animated logo appearance, etc., for our company. We achieved the desired result in a short time. I recommend her.
5.0
Improve the parsing software. Expand and structure the functionality.
Personal
112 USD
I was completely satisfied with the collaboration. The initial task was to refine and improve the existing parser — it was necessary to increase its stability, speed up the data collection process, and establish correct information export.
The freelancer proved to be a true professional. What I especially want to highlight:
Quick immersion in the project: The contractor quickly understood the current code and the specifics of collecting our B2B data.
Performance optimization: The parser started working several times faster. Now processing large datasets (thousands of links and points of sale) occurs without crashes or freezes.
Data cleanliness: The script outputs clearly structured information that requires no additional manual edits and is fully ready for further use.
Communication: The specialist was always in touch, responded appropriately to edits, and adhered to the agreed deadlines.
I recommend them as a reliable and competent developer. I will definitely reach out again for automation tasks!
Next, there are a few more stages of software improvement.
The freelancer proved to be a true professional. What I especially want to highlight:
Quick immersion in the project: The contractor quickly understood the current code and the specifics of collecting our B2B data.
Performance optimization: The parser started working several times faster. Now processing large datasets (thousands of links and points of sale) occurs without crashes or freezes.
Data cleanliness: The script outputs clearly structured information that requires no additional manual edits and is fully ready for further use.
Communication: The specialist was always in touch, responded appropriately to edits, and adhered to the agreed deadlines.
I recommend them as a reliable and competent developer. I will definitely reach out again for automation tasks!
Next, there are a few more stages of software improvement.
5.0
Submission of reports and calculations
Personal
33 USD
I sincerely thank Victoria for her professional work, support, and responsible approach. Thanks to her help, I was able to avoid confusion with documents and possible fines or other troubles. I will gladly turn to her again and sincerely recommend her to my acquaintances. I am very grateful for the collaboration!
5.0
Setting up targeted advertising - Facebook and Instagram.
Personal
246 USD
the collaboration did not meet hopes and expectations, in the dry residue the result is negative (the budget for advertising and payment for services has been wasted) - perhaps the performer approached the advertising setup carelessly... there are no words, only emotions(((
Apartment drawings
603 USD
Thank you Roman for the timely completed work. I really liked that everything was done clearly according to the template. Roman asked the right questions, it is clear that he is an experienced person who understands well how to properly design and execute drawings. The work was done qualitatively, neatly, and professionally.
5.0
I am very satisfied with the collaboration. Ruslan professionally carried out the transfer of the website to the live domain, was always in touch, and responded very quickly to messages. I especially want to highlight his initiative: even after the main work was completed, he helped to address additional issues that arose during the website launch. All questions were resolved quickly, calmly, and constructively. It is clear that he is not just completing tasks according to the specifications, but is genuinely interested in the outcome and ready to help find solutions. I definitely recommend him for collaboration to other clients.
5.0
Video editing
Personal
93 USD
Great job! I am satisfied with the collaboration with Denis. The work is done with quality, Denis is always in touch and always polite and professional. He made the corrections I requested. I plan to work with him on future projects as well and I recommend him to everyone.
5.0
Refinement of the website on WP
212 USD
Thank you, Volodymyr, for your work! The task of refining the website on WP has been completed at 200%. Many aspects that I thought would need further work after completing this task were pleasantly surprising. All comments were addressed, and all tasks were completed on time. As promised - always in touch.) I recommend this specialist for collaboration!
5.0
Submit applications to the court for the cancellation of the default judgment (collectors FC ACE)
45 USD
Thank you, Ludwig, for your professional assistance! A very knowledgeable lawyer. He helped me navigate a complicated situation with the court and enforcement proceedings, provided step-by-step advice on obtaining an electronic signature abroad, and prepared all the necessary documents. I recommend him for collaboration as a reliable specialist!
5.0
I don't like leaving negative reviews, but in this case, I find it necessary.
The problem isn't even that the result turned out poorly. In any project, there are mistakes, different visions, or complex tasks. The issue is how the performer behaves when it becomes clear that the result significantly differs from the assigned task.
The initial specifications provided references and clearly stated that the models needed to be as close to them as possible. Yes, the references were created using AI. But this was explicitly mentioned before the work began. The performer saw these materials, agreed to carry out the project, stated their price, and did not ask any clarifying questions regarding the specifications, the complexity of the work, or the impossibility of achieving the desired result.
Moreover, understanding the complexity of the task, I suggested increasing the budget almost threefold from the performer's initial rate. So when it came to increasing payment, there were no comments regarding the specifications, the complexity of the work, or the impracticality of reviewing the cost.
After receiving the first results, it became clear that the problem was not in individual details or minor flaws. The problem was in the very approach to performing the work.
For clarity, I am adding:
* the initial specifications;
* the result obtained from this performer;
* the result from another performer who is currently working on the same project.
Anyone can independently assess how well the obtained models meet the requirement of "as close to the specifications as possible."
I want to specifically draw attention to the quality of the first result.
Initially, I received not five different models of bison, but actually one basic model that was used multiple times with minimal changes. The bodies, poses, proportions, and overall geometry were practically identical. Visually, it looked like the same bison, just scaled to different sizes with slight changes in individual details.
It was after this that I had serious doubts about the further results of the project. Because when the task is to create several different sculptures, and you end up with one model that has essentially been used five times, questions arise quite naturally.
It is especially strange to read statements about unclear specifications after this. If the performer truly did not understand the assigned task, it would have been logical to ask clarifying questions before starting the work. Instead, there were no questions at all. Issues with the specifications only became known after the result raised justified comments.
It is even more strange to read claims about unclear technical specifications after another performer, working on the same task with the same source materials and after clarifying a few technical points, produced a result that practically immediately met expectations and did not require significant corrections.
It turns out that the problem was not in the specifications after all.
I was also genuinely surprised by the performer's stance on the cost of the work.
At the beginning of the project, the performer themselves proposed a rate of about 1000 UAH per model. Understanding the complexity of the task and wanting to achieve a quality result, I suggested increasing the payment to 3000 UAH per model in case of quality execution of the work. The performer agreed to this proposal without any objections.
Therefore, after this, it is quite strange to read comments about "we are not on OLX" and that it is inappropriate to discuss the cost of the work here.
When the client voluntarily increases the budget almost threefold — this turns out to be absolutely normal. But when, after receiving a result that significantly differs from the assigned task, the client offers one of the compromise options for resolving the situation by adjusting the cost of the work, it suddenly starts to be called bargaining and mentioning OLX.
In my opinion, such a stance seems at least inconsistent.
I also want to highlight the style of communication of the performer.
Instead of constructive discussion, I received explanations that I do not understand the process of 3D modeling, as well as advice to "start with a sheet of paper and a pencil with an eraser."
In my opinion, a professional differs from an amateur in that they can argue their position without resorting to personal attacks and without trying to explain any unsuccessful result by the incompetence of the client.
The most surprising thing in this situation is not even the result of the work itself. The most surprising thing is that after receiving a result that obviously significantly differs from the assigned task, the performer did not acknowledge any of their mistakes. On the contrary — all responsibility was shifted onto the client, onto the AI references, onto the specifications, and onto anyone else but the performer themselves.
I proposed several compromise options for resolving the situation, including even full payment for the work. Therefore, the issue was never about money. The issue was about an adequate attitude towards one's own work and respect for the client.
I do not recommend collaborating. Not because the performer made a mistake or did not cope with the task. Such things can happen to anyone.
I do not recommend due to the unwillingness to acknowledge obvious flaws in the result, shifting responsibility onto the client, double standards when discussing the cost of the work, and unprofessional communication during the dispute resolution.
If anyone doubts the objectivity of this review — it is enough to compare the specifications, the result of this performer, and the result of another performer, which are attached below. These images will say much more than any comments from me or them.
The problem isn't even that the result turned out poorly. In any project, there are mistakes, different visions, or complex tasks. The issue is how the performer behaves when it becomes clear that the result significantly differs from the assigned task.
The initial specifications provided references and clearly stated that the models needed to be as close to them as possible. Yes, the references were created using AI. But this was explicitly mentioned before the work began. The performer saw these materials, agreed to carry out the project, stated their price, and did not ask any clarifying questions regarding the specifications, the complexity of the work, or the impossibility of achieving the desired result.
Moreover, understanding the complexity of the task, I suggested increasing the budget almost threefold from the performer's initial rate. So when it came to increasing payment, there were no comments regarding the specifications, the complexity of the work, or the impracticality of reviewing the cost.
After receiving the first results, it became clear that the problem was not in individual details or minor flaws. The problem was in the very approach to performing the work.
For clarity, I am adding:
* the initial specifications;
* the result obtained from this performer;
* the result from another performer who is currently working on the same project.
Anyone can independently assess how well the obtained models meet the requirement of "as close to the specifications as possible."
I want to specifically draw attention to the quality of the first result.
Initially, I received not five different models of bison, but actually one basic model that was used multiple times with minimal changes. The bodies, poses, proportions, and overall geometry were practically identical. Visually, it looked like the same bison, just scaled to different sizes with slight changes in individual details.
It was after this that I had serious doubts about the further results of the project. Because when the task is to create several different sculptures, and you end up with one model that has essentially been used five times, questions arise quite naturally.
It is especially strange to read statements about unclear specifications after this. If the performer truly did not understand the assigned task, it would have been logical to ask clarifying questions before starting the work. Instead, there were no questions at all. Issues with the specifications only became known after the result raised justified comments.
It is even more strange to read claims about unclear technical specifications after another performer, working on the same task with the same source materials and after clarifying a few technical points, produced a result that practically immediately met expectations and did not require significant corrections.
It turns out that the problem was not in the specifications after all.
I was also genuinely surprised by the performer's stance on the cost of the work.
At the beginning of the project, the performer themselves proposed a rate of about 1000 UAH per model. Understanding the complexity of the task and wanting to achieve a quality result, I suggested increasing the payment to 3000 UAH per model in case of quality execution of the work. The performer agreed to this proposal without any objections.
Therefore, after this, it is quite strange to read comments about "we are not on OLX" and that it is inappropriate to discuss the cost of the work here.
When the client voluntarily increases the budget almost threefold — this turns out to be absolutely normal. But when, after receiving a result that significantly differs from the assigned task, the client offers one of the compromise options for resolving the situation by adjusting the cost of the work, it suddenly starts to be called bargaining and mentioning OLX.
In my opinion, such a stance seems at least inconsistent.
I also want to highlight the style of communication of the performer.
Instead of constructive discussion, I received explanations that I do not understand the process of 3D modeling, as well as advice to "start with a sheet of paper and a pencil with an eraser."
In my opinion, a professional differs from an amateur in that they can argue their position without resorting to personal attacks and without trying to explain any unsuccessful result by the incompetence of the client.
The most surprising thing in this situation is not even the result of the work itself. The most surprising thing is that after receiving a result that obviously significantly differs from the assigned task, the performer did not acknowledge any of their mistakes. On the contrary — all responsibility was shifted onto the client, onto the AI references, onto the specifications, and onto anyone else but the performer themselves.
I proposed several compromise options for resolving the situation, including even full payment for the work. Therefore, the issue was never about money. The issue was about an adequate attitude towards one's own work and respect for the client.
I do not recommend collaborating. Not because the performer made a mistake or did not cope with the task. Such things can happen to anyone.
I do not recommend due to the unwillingness to acknowledge obvious flaws in the result, shifting responsibility onto the client, double standards when discussing the cost of the work, and unprofessional communication during the dispute resolution.
If anyone doubts the objectivity of this review — it is enough to compare the specifications, the result of this performer, and the result of another performer, which are attached below. These images will say much more than any comments from me or them.
Setting up Deep Linking / redirect, or other for Google Maps links from Telegram (iOS and Android)
22 USD
Thank you, Anastasia, for the wonderful and prompt work! The task of setting up Deep Linking for Google Maps was completed in just a few minutes thanks to the availability of a ready-made and tested solution. Everything works perfectly on both iOS and Android. I recommend collaborating with her as a top-class specialist!
