Nice stuff! From a webdev point of view, you have several places you can speed up your site - for example on this page:
http://www.garden-craft.com/index.php/custom-pergolas
Your first image is only viewed at 601px wide - however, the image itself is 2448px wide. Which means your viewer's computer is downloading a huge 2448px image (roughly 3MB in this case) and then downsizing it to 601px. It would be much faster for them, and much better on bandwidth for both of you, if you offered the image itself at the resolution that they'll be viewing it at. And in .png instead of .jpg for even better performance. For example, running your 2.8MB .jpg through tinypng.com's compression results in a 545kb image with no visible loss in quality. - that will load six times faster for your client, while using up 1/6th of your bandwidth.
Now if you did the same thing, and then resized it down to your delivery size (601px wide), you end up going from 2.8MB down to 118k - 24 times smaller and faster for both you and them.
And if you want to still offer them the ability to see your image in extreme detail, I'd link the small, compressed 601px image to the 2448px (but still compressed) image so they view normal quality by default, but still have the option to go really high quality.
That's my only gripe from the web perspective, just loads slow.
Feel free to shoot questions my way, I'm happy to help.