Nope, ya gotta do two coats. Especially exterior. I'm a fan of SW Duration as much as anyone else, but I've never seen one coat look good. That second coat is what turns the corner for color resolution and everything else visual. Can't really speak to how one coat wears because 1. in general, it hasn't been that long that Duration has been on the exteriors I've been involved with and 2. I don't work with any painters who will do one coat on exterior, they won't even quote it that way. It's two coats or they don't want the job. Once you have everything set up and prepped, the painting is the easier part and the second coat always goes smoother, faster than the first -- so what the heck, just get that second coat on there while you're at it. It'll be done right and will protect your house and look great for years to come. I do know that Duration over pre-primed Hardie comes out looking reaaaallllly nice. Hardie & Duration is a nice pairing. Good luck with whatever you decide.

I'm not a pro, and I definitely don't do photorealistic, but I started doing mock-up elevations for our old "Design Around This" threads and started using them when responding to posts. For materials and colors, it is enormously helpful to see everything at scale and in the proportions they will exist in the finished space. When it comes to architecture, I know my visualization skills fall apart when it comes to ceiling elevations, especially where there is a change in ceiling elevations. A 2D floorplan doesn't convey that.

@John Hrivnak, ArCH, AIA, MBA, NCARB, LEED AP - This is a problem with anecdotal evidence. You are not going to architect your way out of a bad builder. When we look at the advantages and disadvantages of design/build firms in aggregate it is pretty easy figure the trade-offs inherent in the model. This is not rocket surgery, it is a simple backward or forward vertical integration business combination and they have been happening a long time now. Somewhere deep in the past a wine maker said. "I think we would be more profitable if we grow the grapes." THE GOOD Every combination requires synergy, so the two parts being better together than they would be apart. In the case of the winery owning the grapes it is a change in the decisions around growing and harvesting grapes. Essentially you can tailor your wine to your grapes and your grapes to your wine. In design/build firms plans will be tailored to take advantage of builder proficiencies and enhanced communications. The designer will be able to anticipate areas where the builder may struggle and will design away from that when possible and communicate more clearly when not. Plans are more likely to hit cost targets as the design process is automatically designing to efficiency. There will also be more communication between the builder and designer during the design phase when they are in the same office. THE BAD Every combination has a sacrifice because of the exclusive nature of the combination. In the case of a winery, if you own the fields and have a grape harvest that is not particularly fantastic while a competing grower has a fantastic harvest, you are still required to use your grapes. If you sell your grapes and buy the others you have destroyed all of the value in the combination. In design/build firms that tailoring of plans to building efficiency will limit creativity. An architect for a design build firm is not going to design towards something the builder is not good at doing. They are going to design to strengths and away from weaknesses. Those strengths and weaknesses might not be shared by every builder. This is a tangible weakness and should be given serious consideration (e.g. If a builder has a preferred window supplier the designer is likely to find a way to incorporate those windows in the design even if a different window would be better). --- This entire thing assumes that quality is equal across the board, which it is not. I can assure you that the answer above is correct, yet it is also meaningless in your decision. Your decision is going to be based on your needs and your market. In your market you may well have several architect driven design/build firms (forward vertical integration), or you might have cost conscience builders providing design services (backward vertical integration). Do your due diligence and then pick the arrangement that you are most comfortable with. I would advise that you take pricing quotes with a grain of salt, the best value is not likely to depend on a quoted upfront price. Also I personally would not look at portability of plans from a design/build firm. This seems like the worst of all worlds... You limit design to strengths of one firm and then don't use that firm. Just my 2 cents... Good luck.

Update. Wanted to come back and thank everyone here who gave feedback. We made many of the changes you suggested. The advice to simplify and to minimize the vertical lines was spot-on! We removed half of the posts, filled in the recess above the roof over the front door (what was that anyway?), used just one siding material (Hardie plank), and painted the corner trim the body color instead of the trim color. It was too late to change the roof or even to connect the roofs over the front and mud room doors, since they are different pitches. Body has been painted SW Pewter Green. Trim is SW Gossamer Veil. We should be able to take pics here in the next couple days.