Someone I have always admired...  

yikes, eye of the beholder...
yikes, eye of the beholder and all that so I'm sure you won't take offense at what is just an opinion.
No sense of depth, detail or craftsmanship, no symbols or structure. I have an artist friend with about a terrabyte of this sort of stuff whipped up in photoshop in about 5 minutes apiece. Layers, maybe layer masks, change the blending mode, alter the opacity, inner glow, outer glow, multiply, colour burn...ah he's using vectors too, they're a little more pleasing.
Seriously if you like this sort of stuff buy cs elements or whatever its called now and save some money and do it yourself. The man is a charlatan.

With
all due respect, the ease or difficulty of producing an image is irrelevant, in my opinion, to the aesthetic content of the artwork -- and isn't that what it (should) be all about ?
I haven't seen this person's work before, but the single image presented is pleasing to look at -- perhaps subtle, and even visually (if not intellectually) provocative ?

.
I disagree, I think skill and learning and a sense of the history of print making is very important. I had a close look at his website and I don't think he demonstrates any of those things, either in text or from the images.
The aesthetic content? About as stimulating as 'homewares boutique' wrapping paper.
What is visually provocative about a few semi opaque, (without even a sense of translucency) circles in a humdrum decorator of the moment magazine palette?
okay, so I had another and then another look to see if I was missing something that two worthy regulars seem to like, I see a shimmering quality which is mildly...there, but of course that could be my eyesight or the refresh rate on the monitor is f&*king up again, but anyway, shimmer or not, there is no cigar.