Today: Queenie Hsiao

Queenie Hsiao’s portfolio feels like the output of someone who is relentlessly curious about interfaces, interactions, and what digital products can feel like when someone genuinely obsesses over the details.

She was previously an intern at Uber and is now returning there full-time straight out of NYU Tisch, and honestly, after going through this portfolio, it’s very easy to understand why.

The whole experience already feels different from most product design portfolios. The side-scrolling structure, the FigJam-like canvas feeling, the amount of experimentation packed into every corner of the site. It all creates the impression that Queenie is someone constantly building, testing, and exploring ideas.

And what impressed me most is that there’s just so much here.

Not filler. Not unfinished scraps. Actual high-quality work, interaction experiments, prototypes, shipped concepts, and visual explorations that all reinforce the same thing: this is someone deeply invested in making digital experiences feel good.

The Good

A rare case where “more” actually makes the portfolio stronger

I usually tell people to curate aggressively.

Three or four strong projects, remove everything else, keep the portfolio focused. Most of the time, that advice is correct because additional work often dilutes the overall quality.

Queenie is one of the rare exceptions where the opposite happens.

There is an enormous amount of work throughout this portfolio, and somehow it consistently strengthens the impression instead of weakening it.

As you move through the site, there are screen recordings, interaction snippets, playground experiments, product explorations, motion pieces, and small interface ideas constantly appearing between the larger projects. In another portfolio, this could easily become distracting or chaotic.

Here, it works because the quality bar stays high.

Even the smaller pieces feel intentional and polished. They reinforce the same strengths over and over again: interaction thinking, visual sensitivity, technical curiosity, and a willingness to experiment.

The playground section especially is massive. There’s product design work, interface explorations, creative coding-adjacent experiments, fashion and photography references, and a lot of things that blur the boundaries between disciplines without ever making the portfolio lose its identity as a product design portfolio.

And that’s an important distinction.

Queenie never feels unfocused. The portfolio still clearly communicates “product designer.” But the surrounding work gives you a much richer understanding of how she thinks and what inspires her.

I genuinely would not want her to remove much from this portfolio. In her case, the breadth is part of the point.

You come away with the impression of someone who constantly makes things, constantly experiments, and constantly refines their taste through exploration. That’s an incredibly valuable signal.

Extremely confident visual storytelling with almost no unnecessary text

The second standout strength is the storytelling inside the case studies.

Queenie’s projects are told almost entirely through visuals.

The amount of text is minimal. Sometimes it’s just a heading and a sentence. Occasionally there’s barely any body text at all. And somehow, the stories still land perfectly.

That only works when the visuals are doing an enormous amount of heavy lifting, and they absolutely are here.

The interfaces are presented clearly, the motion communicates interaction naturally, and the products feel believable and grounded. You understand the flow, the intent, and the experience very quickly without needing long explanations.

One of the strongest examples is the Dandi project.

The case study itself is a relatively short scroll, but I learned more from it than from many case studies three times its size. The visuals are sequenced well, the pacing is strong, and Queenie clearly understands exactly what information matters and what can be removed.

That restraint is difficult.

A lot of designers use extra text as a safety blanket because they’re worried the work won’t speak for itself. Queenie trusts the work, and in this case, she’s right to do so.

There’s also a very strong sense of product realism throughout the portfolio. The interfaces don’t feel like isolated mockups placed into a template. They feel like products that could genuinely exist.

And when the work is already this strong visually, that level of concise storytelling becomes incredibly effective.

The Potential

The playground and experiments deserve a bit more context

One thing I kept wanting throughout the portfolio was just a little more framing around some of the experimental work.

Not full case studies. Definitely not.

But many of the smaller interaction snippets and playground pieces are impressive enough that they deserve at least a tiny bit of explanation.

Some of the screen recordings are shown fairly small, and while they clearly look polished and technically interesting, there are moments where you’re left wondering:

• What exactly is this?

• Was this a prototype?

• Was this built in React or Three.js?

• Was this part of a larger project?

• Was this purely exploratory?

Even something as simple as a hover tooltip or tiny contextual label would help tremendously.

For example:

That extra layer of context would make the playground feel even more cohesive and would also communicate her technical and interaction capabilities more explicitly.

Right now, the work is visually impressive, but some of the meaning behind it still has to be inferred by the viewer.

The portfolio itself could push interaction design even further

This is a very unusual critique because the portfolio is already excellent.

But Queenie’s interaction work throughout the projects is so strong that it actually raises expectations for the portfolio itself.

The site already has some great moments:

• the FigJam-style scrolling structure,

• the custom right-click context menu,

• the selectable canvas behavior,

• the draggable vector points on her name,

• subtle hover interactions throughout.

Those are all great.

But considering the level of interaction experimentation shown elsewhere in the portfolio, it almost feels like the portfolio itself could have gone even further.

For example, the business cards could potentially be interactive objects you flip through. Projects might be draggable or resizable like real FigJam elements. Certain sections could react more dynamically to interaction in ways that mirror the experimental work she’s already showcasing.

The foundation for this is already there. The portfolio already feels playful and interface-driven.

I just think Queenie is capable of pushing that concept even harder.

And to be clear, this is absolutely “sprinkles on top of the icing” territory. The portfolio is already operating at a level that far exceeds most student portfolios I’ve seen.

But when someone demonstrates this much interaction talent elsewhere, it naturally makes you curious what would happen if they fully unleashed that energy onto the portfolio itself.

The Verdict

Queenie’s portfolio is one of the strongest examples I’ve seen of a young product designer who combines technical curiosity, interaction thinking, visual craft, and relentless experimentation into one cohesive body of work.

It feels alive.

There’s an energy throughout the portfolio that comes from someone constantly making things, constantly testing ideas, and genuinely caring about how digital experiences feel.

The amount of work here would overwhelm most portfolios. In Queenie’s case, it becomes a strength because the quality remains consistently high across almost everything she shows.

On top of that, the storytelling is exceptionally restrained and confident. The projects communicate through visuals first, which makes the portfolio feel modern, sharp, and highly intentional.

The remaining opportunities are relatively small: adding more context around experimental work and potentially pushing the portfolio’s own interaction layer even further.

But honestly, it’s already very clear why Uber wanted her back.

If you’d like to craft a similarly impressive portfolio Framer is likely your best choice.

Still struggling to get your portfolio off the ground?

Don’t want to spend weeks learning yet another tool? Framer is my top recommendation for building your portfolio — fast, clean, and without the usual headaches.

If you’re just starting out (or even if you’re not), I think Framer is a perfect fit. Here’s why:

• Flat learning curve: The interface feels familiar if you’ve used Figma — plus, there’s a plugin to bring your designs straight in.

• Plenty of learning support: Framer Academy is packed with free tutorials, videos, and guides to help you go from zero to published.

• A huge template library: Tons of high-quality (often free) templates in the marketplace to help you launch quickly without starting from scratch.

• Free if you are a student: Although Framer already offers a generous free plan for everyone, if you are an enrolled student you can get Framer Pro completely for free!

And that’s just scratching the surface. I wrote more about why I recommend Framer here—but honestly, the best way is to try it for yourself.

Affiliate disclaimer: I only recommend tools I personally believe in. Some links in this post are affiliate links, which means I may earn a small commission if you choose to purchase — at no extra cost to you.

How I can help YOU

Do you want your own portfolio reviewed in-depth with a 30-minute advice-packed video review? Or do you require mentoring to figure out a proper strategy for your job search?

I got you!

• Book an in-depth portfolio or resume review with me

• Book a mentoring session with me

• Book a quick 15 min chat to ask a question and see if we vibe