Website!

[Fresh]

looks fab ... only thing i would say is not to slice up everything or reduce the number of slices and if you can use HTML background colours rather than sliced jpg (guessed you used fireworks to chop it all up) ... the only reason is people on a slow link cannot access the website until all the jpg's (the onload command) are loaded, this can take a while and people if on a slow link will not bother if it takes too long to see the first page.

as you are a graphic designer you will know that gif's can be better if more of the picture is one colour (if you reduce the pallette) and jpg better for complex pics.

so not fault of the desgn ... more of the customer experience when the first hit your site

[Shaun]

Thanks for the input and suggestions

The actual site building work was done by a mate that owns a web design / hosting company as I've never built a site before. I personally think he's done an awesome job..I couldn't be happier.

I'll pass on your comments onto him. Cheers for the tips.

[Fresh]

its only that you could have say 10 pictures totalling 60kb where as it could be resliced to just 4 picures totalling 25kb.

each little picture will still normally take up at least 1kb (or more) the less the amount of picture the better the saving, also to reduce the quality to maybe 75% most people will not notice and this will create another good saving

[jwpentgroup]

Looks fantastic - well done.

[pdarnett]

Very well done, making me jealous now, (and dragging out the web design books again)

[dj andy allwood]

proffesional looking very nice.

[Addicted 2 Bass]

Very posh!

Well done!

Josh

[Shaun]

Thanks for all the comments...very much appreciated.

[Have a disco]

nice site but why did you not maximize on page size??

[Shaun]

The design style was a consious decision. I wanted a compact look that didn't require any scrolling