Frame galleries
A grid of eyewear photography, usually stock, usually of brands every practice within twenty miles also stocks. It differentiates nothing and it is what most optician website pitches lead with.
A practice website built around the clinic, not the frames
Almost every optician website pitch leads with frame photography and virtual try-on. Neither is why a patient picks a practice. The website’s real job is to triage an enquiry, explain what your fee buys against a chain advertising free, and never once put an appointment in your diary that you did not agree to.
- Practice sites from £3,900
- Request and confirm, not a live diary
- One independent practice built
- Not dental. Ask me why
What I have actually done in this sector
One independent optician. A triaged intake that routes a request properly before anyone confirms it, a deliberate decision against a live booking calendar, a dated fee tariff the practice edits itself including its membership bands, a governance section holding the documents patients and regulators ask for, and clinical services structured as data so a second discipline could be added without a rebuild.
One practice, not a specialism. I was the developer on it during four years at a web studio in East Sussex, so the build predates Kestrel. Everything on this page comes from that work or from other regulated single-site builds where the same problems recur, and I have said which is which.
What everyone else is selling you
Not a criticism of the agencies concerned. It is simply what the market has settled on, and it is aimed at the owner rather than the patient.
Virtual try-on
Genuinely impressive, occasionally useful, and almost never the reason someone chooses a practice. It is a feature sold to the owner rather than a problem solved for the patient.
A booking widget
Dropped in from whatever the practice-management vendor offers, styled differently from the rest of the site, and offering one appointment length for every service.
What I would build instead
01
Triage the request, do not just collect it
First visit or returning, which service, anything urgent, contact lenses or not. Enough for whoever confirms it to pick the right slot length without a phone call. On the build behind this page that is thirteen fields, and each one exists because leaving it out had cost somebody a call.
02
Never let the website fill the diary
Request and confirm, not a live calendar. Appointment lengths differ by service and a website cannot know which one someone needs, so a live calendar either offers the wrong length or forces you to publish a diary you then defend.
03
A tariff you edit yourself
Dated fees, including any membership or payment-plan bands, changed by you rather than by whoever last had the login. The price a patient reads should be the price you charge this month.
04
Governance with a proper home
Policies, complaints route, registration details and the documents a patient or a regulator asks for, structured and findable in one hop instead of a PDF in the footer.
05
Services as data, not pages
Clinical services held as their own content type, so adding audiology or a dispensing specialism later is a new entry rather than a rebuild. On that build it was tested by a second discipline arriving after launch.
06
Answer the free-eye-test question
A chain down the road advertises free. If your site does not explain what your fee buys and what the test actually involves, the comparison happens without you in the room.
The one I will argue hardest for
No live booking calendar. It is the feature most practices ask for and the one I push back on, because a website does not know whether the person filling in the form needs twenty minutes or fifty. A live calendar solves that by guessing, which produces a diary full of wrong-length appointments, or by publishing every slot you have, which is a different problem.
Request and confirm adds one step and gets it right every time. The patient chooses a preference, the practice confirms the slot that actually fits, and nobody has to ring anybody to unpick it. If your practice-management software genuinely does this well, use it and I will build around it rather than replacing it.
Why not dental
Because it is the most saturated niche in UK web design, defended by agencies with a decade of case studies and outcome data I do not have. Walking in with one optician build and calling it dental experience would be exactly the sort of claim this site exists not to make.
The same proof does transfer honestly to audiology, physiotherapy and private single-site clinics, where the problems are the same, the regulatory shape is comparable, and nobody is fighting especially hard. If that is you, the mechanisms above apply and I will say plainly which parts I have done before.
What to read next
A practice site is a bespoke build; anything that talks to practice-management software becomes a web app. Fees are on pricing, being found locally is on the SEO and AI search page, and the other sectors I have built for are listed together.
Questions people actually ask
Why not a live booking calendar?
Because appointment lengths differ by service and a website does not know which one someone needs. A live calendar either offers the wrong slot length or forces you to publish a diary you then have to defend. Request and confirm is slower by one step and correct every time. This is the single thing I would argue hardest for.
How do you stop the booking form wasting my time?
Triage it. A well-built intake asks enough to route the request: first visit or returning, which service, anything urgent, contact-lens wearer or not. Then the person confirming it can pick the right slot without a phone call. On the build this page comes from that is thirteen fields, and every one of them exists because leaving it out cost somebody a call.
Can I publish and edit my own fees?
You should, and yes. A dated tariff you can change yourself, including any membership or payment-plan bands, so the price a patient sees is the price you charge this month rather than the one your web developer last typed in. It also answers the question a chain advertising a free test has already put in their head.
What about the governance documents?
They get a proper home rather than a PDF in a footer. Practice policies, complaints route, registration details and the things a patient or a regulator asks for, structured so they are findable in one hop. I structure it; the content is yours or your professional body's.
Can it handle a second discipline later?
It should be built assuming it will. Clinical services as their own content type rather than hand-built pages means adding audiology, or a dispensing specialism, is a new entry rather than a rebuild. On the build behind this page that was tested by a second discipline being added after launch.
How many opticians have you built for?
One independent practice. Everything on this page is either from that build or from other regulated single-site work where the same problems appear. I will not stretch it to dental, which is a different market with its own specialists and a decade of case studies I do not have.
What does it cost?
A practice site with triaged intake, an editable tariff and a governance section sits in the bespoke range, £3,900. If it needs to integrate with practice-management software that becomes a web app and starts with paid discovery at £950.
Tell me about the practice, not the frames.
Get a quote in four questions
hello@madebykestrel.co.uk · replies inside one working day
This page, measured in your browser
Your deviceLCPMeasuring…
–
How long until the main content appears. Google wants under 2.5 seconds.
INPMeasuring…
–
How quickly the page answers when you tap. Under 200ms is the target.
CLSMeasuring…
–
How much the layout moves while loading. Under 0.1, ideally zero.
Real numbers from your device and connection, not a screenshot of a score I chose. Nothing is sent anywhere. The measurement happens in your browser and stays there. If one of these ever reads amber on my own site, you will see it, which is rather the point. I audit these for £650.