Streaming live at 10am (PST)

I'll Give $50 If You Can Show How Daniel Spatzek's Navigation Works!

Daniel’s site had me in Awe the first time I saw it, it’s what brought me here last week.

I now understand triggers and can make them and work with them effectively. I have spent time inspecting Daniel’s page and understand how it works.

However, I cannot understand one simple thing about Daniel’s website and it’s this.

How the outside NAV links can cause different triggers depending on what is in the active view, at the current time.

How can the “projects” link at the “about” page (at bottom) here:

make the active viewable “about” page go to the left, and make the “projects” page come up…

But on say… the “contact” page here, the “projects” link:

makes the “contact” page go to the right, and the “projects” page come up?

So in short, the same “projects” link is doing 2 different things.

I’ve inspected the site and it’s not some js code or something like that. I just can’t figure this out and it’s killing me!

Hi @TravisBKlein, we meet again :smile:

So you don’t think he’s using any extra js plugins?

If that’s the case did you know you can make a single trigger, a button for instance perform mulple different actions/animations on multiple objects?


Edit: I’ll give $50 if someone can figure this out, lol I dunno if that’s allowed but hey, why not!

Hey Aaron, and yea we do meet again :stuck_out_tongue:

Yep I am sure he doesn’t use js on the front end of his navigation.

1) he said so and showed his site off allowing people to see it on webflow
2) you can inspect and see
3) I’m going insane, maybe I’m just not smart enough :frowning: It’s a logical problem more so than a webflow problem I’m having getting this I think.

This post here he made he even says this:

source: Award winning portfolio of Daniel Spatzek

You can check his site as it was back then, and see the navigation has not changed one bit (from may 2015):

You can inspect and see he’s interchanging Divs to put the “home” on the pages he’s on so that there is a link back “Home”. If he was using js, there would be no need for that.

Yea, Aaron just yesterday I spent all day (literally) learning how triggers and interactions work and how you can have one element trigger multiple things.

But you CANNOT make one element trigger one element one time, and another element on a different time. (or as far as I know I guess)

Hey Travis,

unfortunately I can’t show you my webflow site inlcuding all the triggers on the menu.

I have no access anymore but I think I can remember the logic of the navigation.

I will try to keep it short and simple:

First of all I didn’t use JS for this. Every single button (projects, about, newsblog, contact) triggers all eventualities.

For example the contact button:

  • It slides the home-block to left ( -100%).
  • It slides the contact-block from -100% right to origin (which is the
    center of the page).
  • After this transition it also triggers the home block to JUMP back to origin ( so its in the center again but BEHIND the contact-block which is visible now).
  • All the other navigation buttons become smaller and the contact button is replaced by another button (HOME)
  • The clue is: all of the 4 nav buttons ALSO trigger ALL of the 4 other blocks to slide back to their INITIAL POSITION (which is -100% left/right/top/bottom). If they are not centered nothing happens because they are already on this position. (there are a few more triggers but they are not important to undestand the nav concept)

So if i remeber correctly I wrote at least 30+ triggers on each of the nav buttons (all the animations after the slides appear had to be triggered too).

I hope my explanation helps. When I created the concept I was puzzling at least 3 days on the navigation to see if it is even possible. I remember melting my brain by sitting on my desk and moving around colored paper cards to figure it out ^^

Cheers Daniel

PS:Please don’t clone the site 1:1. I put a lot of effort into this and it wouldn’t be fair if someone just makes a copy of it. But I 'm pretty sure you didn’t intend to do so anyway :slight_smile:

PPS: webflow is awesome but the pricing concept sucks hard

1 Like

@dnlsptzk Why does the Webflow pricing have anything todo with you being able to share your site? There is a free option and personal option. Users that are referring to the Webflow plans don’t understand what they are getting both a design, development and implementation tool.
You compare Webflow to Adobe whose pricing is also subscription based and not cheap or web centered.

I find it funny that you don’t want someone to “clone” your work (time, effort, expense) but you don’t value the product Webflow is providing.

First of all thanks Daniel!

Second of all, yea I figured out the first steps, and they were easy to do.

The “clue” part is what I want to smack myself across the head for!!!

I know its wrong but everytime I kept thinking well I can’t move them -100 each time because some will eventually be -800 depending on the route people take.

But -100 doesn’t mean move it -100 from it is CURRENTLY, it’s move -100 from where it STARTED! I’m such an idiot! I kept getting confused about this when it would say “move back to origin” I would think oh yea move back to where it RECENTLY came from. But that’s wrong.

Thanks Daniel!

And no no I would never clone your site, I have just been obsessed with outside navigation and the utility of it that YOU showed me.

You are the man, thanks.


1 Like

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

1 Like


If you just want usage of the product and don’t want the hosting use a Personal plan for $16/month and you can export your project when completed, delete it and then start a new one. I believe that would work and then you could build as many (non CMS) sites as you wanted.

Again, I say that I think users referring to the Webflow plans as being greedy don’t understand the value. Every site you do in Webflow will take more storage especially if you have a lot of backups of a site. If you don’t understand business overhead and making a profit that could be an issue for you in business.

Clearly, I know that you being upset about Webflow’s pricing and someone cloning your site aren’t identical situations. The point was that you value your time, effort, expense, ideas and implementation and you should also value the time, effort, expense, ideas, implementation and support offered by Webflow.

1 Like

@jdesign exporting isn’t really a solution to what @dnlsptzk is talking about considering there is no import function when site updates need to be made

1 Like

@dapitts08 You can make changes to the html or css on any exported site. If you want the advantage of having the visual tools of Webflow then there is value in building and hosting with Webflow.

@dnlsptzk You are assuming a lot about my logic…and you are assuming incorrectly…although your response isn’t very clear. Did you read and think about what I wrote? I didn’t mention anything about charging 5x the reactivations (whatever you mean by that)…I said you can make changes in the exported code. If the sites need constant updates then maybe Webflow is a good valuable solution.

@dnlsptzk does have one, or two valid points in his argument about cost of webflow. First, let me say I am a stalwart supporter of webflow and think it is an awesome tool. And since I have been using it there has been very responsive addressing of bugs, bringing on new features and all that. But @dnlsptzk touches on a couple of things about webflow that I as a developer agree with and find very frustrating about webflow. I don’t really agree with his logic in comparison to adobe but thats another argument.

I don’t mind as much having to pay more money for more sites. I’m not overly happy about it but I don’t mind because I see it as supporting ongoing development. But the part that is most annoying is you are stuck leaving sites in the system if you are an active developer and the pile grows. Because you cannot export then import a site. And of course you support your clients and clients need changes made from time to time. I have even one page websites stuck in the system. Because what happens if a client wants something changed and they will and do. I cannot import their webflow created site into webflow. So either I have to edit it manually or simply leave it in webflow for the invariable time when something needs to be edited or changed and that time will come. Its way more hassle to try and figure out how to edit their site and make changes outside of webflow when the site is built by webflow.
I understand the math behind this. If webflow makes it so I can export and import I’d never need anything beyond a basic plan. But think about this, webflow staff. There is a way around this. Simply make export/import only available on professional plans. Then if you like, even charge me a couple of bucks to import a webflow site. I’d go for it. Just my two cents on the cross-thread.


If it was easy to build importing of HTML/CSS into Webflow, we would have launched that a long time ago. Unfortunately it’s an extremely difficult problem to solve from a technical standpoint. We hear your feedback, but I want to make clear that we’re not avoiding import just so we can charge more for more sites in your account. We charge more for more sites in your account so it aligns with our costs to store and deliver them on-demand whenever you want to make changes for those demanding clients :blush:


yes but we are not really talking about importing of “html/css” necessarily. We’re talking about packaging a webflow site for export in a way that it can be imported back at a later date. These could be two different things. This way, we can take all of those sites developed for clients that might hardly ever or never need changes, export them out so they are not taking up room, then if the time comes, import them back in order to make changes.

As it stands, your pricing model has a point of diminishing returns for me once we reach the 100+ mark in my opinion. I can stand paying about $35 a month for use of the program. But then when it becomes $80 a month well it is much less palatable. $80 because I have 100+ websites in the system, 95 of which I have to keep in the system because of the occasional change that might be necessary and a few that are actively being modified perhaps. But in reality I am paying now $80 a month for the one or 2 new sites I might develop each month. And if I don’t have any development work for say a few months in effect I am paying you $80 a month in rent just to keep all those sites in the system that I may or may not need to touch for some time if ever. The more I think about it the more I find it really does have a point where I have to make some serious considerations about webflow in terms of overall cost. It’s great right now when I only have about 20 sites in the system but what happens when I reach 100?


A post was split to a new topic: Feedback on current pricing structure

I think Daniel (@dnlsptzk) has made his point and his unhappiness with how the pricing of Webflow is VERY clear on multiple threads, I counted 2. I agree with him, but Daniel, on a personal note, you’re too aggressive with your replies man. Btw, your site is freaking cool.

And I think it isn’t fair for the Webflow dev team at all, when you kept putting things like as though Webflow was trying to force things down people’s throat. I mean they have tonnes of things they could do, and of course since about a year ago when I joined and paid for the $78 plan, I’ve seen great commitment in terms of their effort and promises.

What I’m trying to say is that, give them time, provide your feedback, and time will tell. After all, like you said, nothing comes free. Just because of own bias, we think we know how easy/difficult something can be, and we are quick to yell at the other party “How difficult could this be?”. Aren’t we becoming the very “clients/customers” we kept complaining about?

Just some thoughts mate. Cheers.


This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.