Yes, you may have just learned CSS and everything may seem as if it belongs in a box, but hell, there is nothing wrong with that. Its simple and, something else, something that is like sophisticated, but I dont want to say that. I like it, I think maybe a bigger difference between the background and the actual content, right now the pattern is indistinguishable from the black. I like the color, I like the type. It may need some more heirarchy, so that the different entries have a little more to distinguish themselves. Otherwise, forge forth!

I like how you've broken down your css styles into different sections, but I would recommend externally linking your style sheet (though you may already be planning such a move when the site goes live). Also, be careful with your div tags, your making a div tag for everything. You should learn to use selectors such as here

http://css.maxdesign.com.au/selectutorial/selectors_descendant.htm

It will save you from drowning in divs. Also remember, you can apply a class or id to anything, include p, img, ul, you name it.

I think you've got a good thing going here. It could use some small improvements, like the background pattern as kenyabob mentioned, and I might make your logo+navigation links stand out just a little more (maybe you could make the logo bigger and make the links in a sans-serif font similar to the logo).

I see very little if none at all here that shouldn't be viewable in any browser, by that I mean one that's hot off the developing shelf or one that's five years old (well you never know!) I prefer not to use div tags where a normal p or td will do, I try to stick to using css in the form of an external style sheet for text styles only, where possible, but you should always appreciate that some people may have their own style sheet forced on your page (a few browsers allow this) so the browser default styles should also be checked to make sure it still looks good (older browsers might not support css at all).
Older browsers tend to ignore tags they don't recognise and this usually has the effect of destroying the layout; included in css is the style tag, so if you use a style to align your text or image and the browser ignores it then your layout is compromised, usually the old html align tag will work just as well; your page looks as though it could very easily be put together with simple table and td tags, though I know from experience that these wysiwyg editors just love to put in those divs!

IE can be a real stickler when it comes to conformity, whereas something may work perfectly in Firefox it may be all over the place in IE. I know we're Mac users and IE is a piece of proverbial crap, but if your page sticks to standard html (i.e. lose the divs where possible) then you'll be on to a winner that should work even in IE 5 and 6; there's a hell of a lot of people out there who still use IE 6, and I don't think we can really afford to ignore them when a reputation or possibility for employment is at stake.

I think the layout is good, it's only to show still images after all and people don't want too much going on, though I would say that perhaps you should try to move your main image up - if you can make the Place holder Title section shorter so that the image can fit in it's entirity without the user having to scroll down it would be better, and keep navigation to the next picture near the top too so that the user can find it easily (and doesn't have to scroll down).

I like the little Brian logo! :-)

Check my page - www.jonathanmortimer.co.uk/personal/ - before I sorted it out for html / css tags it worked perfectly in Firefox but not in IE, I basically replaced all the layout style tags for normal html align tags and now it even works in Netscape 4.76! The layout is virtually the same as it was before, if anything it is more consistent because I've had to go through the code with a fine tooth comb, and because Netscape doesn't understand css it just ignores the scrolling css code and displays the whole text block (which is contained in a scroll box in newer browsers), so it still works as a webpage.

You're all very kind. I think I'll sit on it for a few days and come back and see if I still hate it. I'll make some doodles in the meantime.

Thanks!

I really like it but I'd use a light sanserif font like "Helvetica Neue Light" instead of Georgia.
But that's just my 2 cents…

don't worry about ur webskills - i mean cmon, look at creativebits ;) lol....if somone s looking for print, they are interested in the outcomes of your works on that medium...ragrdless of how it is presented....you are very talented and do great work bottom line...

Hi again!

I just came back to this and notice that your page is no longer there, this seems a shame as it was quite OK. I must say that my opinions of CSS have changed considerably since my original comment, I have learned a lot and converted some of my web pages to full CSS layout, even CSS rollovers on some! All IE compatible to the best of my knowledge, too.

I do tend to leave my older web pages alone as a reminder of how I have coded things in the past, but when it comes to my portfolio and main stuff then I prefer to keep them up to date. If you're still out there and reading this then by all means take a look at my CSS pages:

http://www.jonathanmortimer.co.uk
http://www.jonathanmortimer.co.uk/adverts
http://www.jonathanmortimer.co.uk/portfolio
http://www.jonathanmortimer.co.uk/nature

Examine the code, check out the stylesheets, use them to learn from and construct your own pages.