Surely the most important thing is, do _you_ like it? What if thousands of people said, yes, we love it, and you hated it? Would that make it any better a choice for you, that you would spend _your_ money on, and live in, a house that strangers picked out for you but that you disliked?
You're going to spend a lot of money on a house, it's not like a $50 pair of shoes that don't look so good once you get them home so you put them in the back of the closet and then after a while send them off to Goodwill. If it doesn't make your heart sing when you see it, move on and look for something else.

This post was edited by colleenoz on Fri, Jan 30, 15 at 11:16

the house is OK ...

i do not like the walkway directly abutting it ... a swath of green lawn between it and the house might help ...

i do NOT like the red garage ... and i am not sure about the connecting thingee.. which was probably a breezeway at one time ...

i like the porch ... but the more i look at it in the first pic.. the house proper is rather ... rather... well.. 4 windows a door and presumably some small bathroom windows up top ... there isnt much there.. architecturally .. other than that cool craftsman-like porch ...

ken

I do like it...I wouldn't post a house for feedback that I didn't like! :-)

But I've been reading this site for a while and I see a lot of elevations get panned for different reasons (too many gables, too much stone, too big of a roof, etc.). I just want to make sure before we start looking for architects that I have an idea of the vision I want, without making too many mistakes.

You will find 100 different opinions. It's very personal. Overall I like it. I like the red barn/garage. I don't like the craftsman pillars bc they look out of place on a farmhouse. Instead of the stone on the proch I would do a classic red/brown brick Architecturally, the side entry with the shed dormer over it and the barn are nicer than the main area. The main area is lacking somewhat. I would make the windows taller and add divided lites more consistent with the farmhouse style and beef up the trim on the windows.

I like it.
I do not like the tapered columns. I also prefer the column pedestals to be about 16" lower.

It's a very sterile looking Craftsfarm house. I don't know what could be done to fix that other than it aging in place for about 25 years :)

I do think that somehow the black window frames on white siding are confusing my eye.

It's OK. Not great. Not horrible either. Really don't like the columns. They don't work at all.

The lines are fine; one thing I would change is the slope of the porch roof; it is too steep, need more siding space above, it crowds the 2nd fl window sills. Porch would probably look better another foot of depth. Craftsman houses are all about sheltering roofs with deep eaves and commodious, welcoming porches for lounging.
Casey

Not especially. Not ugly, just kinda blah.

Doesn't really do anything for me. I like the red garage, it's probably the only thing that sets it apart. It's very plain, those 2 little windows above the front door make it appear odd, like little eyes. Perhaps a couple gables on the main roof would give it a little more character. Porch railing would help, not sure about mixing the metal and comp roofs, makes the porch look like an after thought. Something about the columns doesn't seem right, maybe too massive? Maybe better w/6 smaller ones connected w/railing (which would put a post in front of both windows).

Ok, I'll keep looking :-)

I think I like the red barn garage and the overall simplicity compared to gable-ville. I agree something seems off about the roof and the porch roof, but maybe it's the angle of the photo.

I would not call it pretty....stately, sturdy, maybe attractive, but not pretty.

This is pretty :) {{gwi:2133161}}From Lavender Lass

And I found this, too....so I thought I'd share! {{gwi:2133162}}From Lavender Lass

This post was edited by lavender_lass on Fri, Jan 30, 15 at 14:09

Not a fan for some reason. It looks like a mish-mash of styles that don't really work together for me. I think some of it is the main roof style.

That IS pretty, LavenderLass, is that your house? :-)

I think maybe the porch roof needs to be flatter and the main roof steeper, like this one?

{{gwi:2133163}}

[Farmhouse Exterior[(https://www.houzz.com/photos/farmhouse-exterior-home-ideas-phbr1-bp~t_736~s_2114) by Middlebury Interior Designers & Decorators Connor Homes

The house isn't perfect but it has a level of elegance, restraint and avoidance of cliches rarely seen in house designs on the internet. Thanks for posting it.

Thanks, Renovator. What would you change?

No, but it's such a pretty house. I like your second choice much better! Much more welcoming :)

I don't know if it's "appropriate" but I would extend the porch across the front of the house and maybe connect it to the side porch. Railings would be nice, too.

Maybe move the dormers to the back...if you need the light. I think this would give the home more of a farmhouse feel and make it a little less imposing.

You could add shutters to the front windows, too...but there's a limit to what I can do with the Paint program! LOL

For the right side (sunroom/dining room?) I would have pretty shrubs below the windows. You could match that look in front of the garage, too. Maybe roses, hydrangea, azaleas...whatever works well in your climate and with your tastes! {{gwi:2133164}}From Home pictures

This post was edited by lavender_lass on Fri, Jan 30, 15 at 15:29

I do not like the first house you posted. The tiny windows are there, I suppose, to make it a "modern" farmhouse. I think it looks odd. I think the second one you posted looks much better.

I think the essential form is pretty good, but I will echo the other changes. Deeper porch with narrower, rectangular columns, and changes to the windows. The windows make it look a little blank or "blind" for some reason. The stone also looks small and pebbly and not authentic. Generally, it has a lot more restraint than most of the houses posted here. It's too rigid to be pretty, but I think it could be handsome with some tweaking.

Do you want a "pretty" house? If so, that's not "pretty". This to me is "pretty".
{{gwi:2133165}}

I think terms like that are important because they help translate what you're looking for and want in your own mind into someone else's, be it a builder or an architect or designer. When I first met with our architect, he asked what kind of house I wanted and instead of colonial or cape or such, I responded, I wanted it to be "adorable". I didn't want it to "proud" and "egotistical". I wanted it to be a house that when people saw the outside said, "Oh, I wonder what it looks like on the inside."

My comments on that house specifically are that the tapered columns seem out of place and the dark barely trimmed windows are not attractive. There's something about the massing too that feels oppressive vs. light.

I like the barn though...the steeper peaked roof and the window trim that shows are attractive.

I'm going to go with . . . no, not pretty.

It may be functional, and it looks like it'd be economical to build, but "pretty" doesn't come to mind right away. My reasoning:

- I like simple, but this over-does simple. I'd like to see some "interest" in the roofline. The windows seem overly plain, even cheap -- I'd like to see some shutters, some window boxes, a curved window. Or maybe if the porch wasn't a straight line parallel to the roofline. Something.
- The two small second-story windows seem too small.
- I agree that the columns don't seem to match the rest of the house in terms of style.
- I'm thinking that the barn is red to make it appear to be a separate-but-attached building -- you know, New England style. But somehow it fails; is it because it's too close to the house and appears to be (at the same time) part of the house AND a barn)?

I like the second house -- the yellow farmhouse -- better, but still not enough that I'd want it for my own. While the two are quite similar, I think the biggest improvements are in the windows and the rooftop gables.

L-Lass is rarely wrong, and I agree that the snowy house is my idea of "pretty", as is the ivy-covered cottage. I also like the enlargement she drew on the yellow house's porch.

What do I like about them? I think the single most important item is that both have an angled feature (or two) at some point. This keeps them from looking so "flat". And they both have nice windows.

I also agree with Annie that it's wise to share words that describe YOUR IDEA of pretty. I like adorable. I'd also venture to add charming, vintage, warm, nostalgic, friendly, inviting, cottage, quaint, sun-filled, comfortable, cozy, welcoming. And I agree with her that I don't personally want a house that could be described as proud or egotistical -- and to my personal negative list I'll add dramatic, cutting-edge, over-sized, over-the-top, soaring, trendy, impressive, modern, contemporary, cookie-cutter.

ButternutAigreDoux, how large a house are you planning?

In my mind, I don't see "pretty" and "farmhouse" or "pretty" and "modern" coming together that often in a house. In my mind, "pretty" would only tend to describe houses of a certain size (on the smaller side). And I think of farmhouses as utilitarian and functional. But, it all depends on your perspective. So additional descriptive words surely would help, as well as more of a sense of the direction you're heading...

For example, I love cottages. But for our family we were going to end up with a house with 10 ft ceilings on the first floor and at least 3500 sq ft -- it just was not going to fit our mental image of a cottage no matter what. So, farmhouse it was. When you get to a certain point the house can take over and tell you what it wants ;-)

I like it. We are looking to build something similar. Found this on houzz by a company called James Thomas, LLC. Not sure why the picture is so blurry.

The last one you posted has charm to me. The first one is not to my liking. It had sort of the look of a colonial with craftsman and then other details with a nod to more modern in architecture. The combination of all those are not working for me.

The last one you posted has the details I associate with a colonial style box farm house so it has charm.

I consider Victorian houses pretty, craftsman, four square, and bungalows handsome, shingle syyle cute,modern style sexy, brutalism a mix between ugly and fascinating, Farmhouses and colonials charming etc. Just examples of where I come from. Now I don't care for when they are mixed up though.

I don't know why I used the word "pretty" since I am not usually drawn to "pretty" things.

I want our house to be warm, functional, modern, homey, and clean.

I don't want our house to be traditional, cute, fancy, frou frou, cold, ugly or sterile.

We are looking around 3700-4000 sq ft.

That's an ambitious set of design goals. I recommend hiring a good architect instead of searching the internet although finding some good examples might be helpful to the architect.

I would like it a lot more if the windows were more substantial. I guess they are going for a certain look with the windows but I love natural light and nice large windows.

This post was edited by MrsB1227 on Sat, Jan 31, 15 at 13:05

I much prefer the yellow one or the blurry one. :)

I don't know what's wrong with the first one. Maybe it looks like a travel trailer (before they started siding them with fiberglass)? Or a storage facility (except that it isn't orange)?

It just doesn't look like a home.

We are planning to hire an architect.. Just feel like if I have some photos going in that it will be helpful. And I don't want the architect to think "they want a house that looks like a trailer or a storage facility" :-)

I can use a lot of words to say what I want, but a picture is worth 1000, right?

Yes! A picture is very good. As you've just shown, we all have different ideas on what is a pretty house so get all the photos you can to show your architect. And I bet a good architect can take that first house and tweak a few things to make it so that even I like it. :)

(Of course, I guess it doesn't have to please ME!)

I also really like this one from the home decorating forum…though would like less gables and dormers I think.

Here is a link that might be useful: JuniperSt's house

I like the first one very much. The only thing I am not crazy about are the two small windows on the second floor in the center. They look to me as though they accommodate the indoor floorplan rather than being chosen to optimize the aesthetics of the facade. imho.

The yellow is pleasant but it feels like a lot of new developments.

I've always like the style called Yankee Modern. Before I found an old house to reno, I was going to use them for a new build beachhouse.

Your descriptors "I want our house to be warm, functional, modern, homey, and clean." made me think of this firm.

Here is a link that might be useful: fyi

I don't like the first house you posted at all. It looks like it was designed by a committee. :)

Mtnrdredux, you have such nice taste, but I gotta say, that one you posted looks like a small version of the factory dairy farms in the San Joaquin Valley.

I can smell it in my mind.

:D

The Southern Living Idea House from a year or so ago
{{gwi:2133166}}

Here is a link that might be useful: 2013 Southern Living Idea House

LOL, Fori, maybe it was stolen from there wholecloth, and we Yankees are none the wiser!

I like this style farm/country house...something basic and cozy and inviting yet durable in its simplicity.
{{gwi:2133167}}

This has been an interesting discussion about the definition of "pretty", which, of course, has no universal definition. What's pretty and appealing is as different as all of us.

When it comes to the appeal of "farm house", however, there are some universal characteristics which may be important to recognize:

--Usually simple, almost utilitarian, shapes, many like the old Monopoly houses and hotels;
--Sometimes the simple "house shapes" may have a "notch-o" and/or "bump-o" and/or a clearly added simple shape, as if the house grew over time to accommodate new/changing needs (which is what happens in every home over time--there is no "forever" house and farm houses are living proof of that);
--These first two characteristics often make possible pleasing and humane overall proportions;
--Simple (mostly) gable roofs, made possible by interiors that are only 1-2 rooms wide;
--Roofs may often be strongly pitched, but not overpowering because they are enclosing only 1-2 rooms in width;
--Porches (the more the better, often found on multiple sides);
--Smaller detached garage and out-buildings;
--Unpretentious materials and consistent overall usage;
--Simple windows and doors (often imaginatively ganged together for their interior purposes)

Just look at the previous three photos and you will see all of these characteristics in each home.

Now compare these characteristics with many of the tract and custom homes we see here and in our neighborhoods:

--Complex, pretentious and bulky shapes, often with no architectural character or recall of history;
--Huge, "fat" plans which are as deep (3 rooms or more) as they are wide, resulting in huge, overpowering roof shapes;
--Complex and mixed roof forms--gable, gables within gables, hips and more, often all in one house;
--Small, ill-proportioned porches or none at all;
--Huge garages, with multiple doors which dominate the exterior of the home (often used for storage, leaving vehicles outside on the drive or street);
--A potpourri of exterior materials used on the front elevation of the home, while the remainder of the elevations may be ignored and inconsistent;
--Little or no thought about the type and placement of windows and doors

So which set of characteristics results in a "pretty" home? I guess everyone will have their own opinion, which, in the end, is as it should be.

What do you think "pretty" is?

If you are looking for inspiration, Thus is a southern living idea house in the farmhouse style. THis would be my version of "pretty".

If you are looking for inspiration, Thus is a southern living idea house in the farmhouse style. THis would be my version of "pretty".

{{gwi:2133156}}

I think that modern culture has lost the ability to understand the beauty of proportion and pure forms of expression.

Vernacular builders of the 18th and early 19th century could often build structures where the beauty was innate, and classical/pleasing proportions seemed to be intuitive and not the result of extensive education--they could do it all by themselves.

Houses now are often complicated masses designed by individual room, then linked together and then covered with details, or "symbols" as author Jonathan Hale calls them in the book I am linking to below. Somehow in latter part of the 19th century, there was a shift in "seeing" that continues unabated.

A nicely proportioned room or house presented on the Decorating and Design forum is often called "hideous" because it doesn't have the right furniture in it, or it lacks any of the current tacked-on details that pass for pleasing, while terribly proportioned rooms of undefinable shape with hard to treat windows and no real good way to place furniture are then called "gorgeous", but it takes 100 responses to figure out how to put a covering on the window or how to place furniture.

The first room may have hideous decoration--especially if you think anything "dated" becomes hideous (which is fairly pervasive)--and the second room may be current and contain all the right stuff for 2015, but the empty room itself is often awful. But most people have lost the ability to see this.

Here is a link that might be useful: The Old Way of Seeing

ButternutAigreDoux,

As someone who went to design school and has renovated two homes and is building their second (4 homes from top to bottom), I encourage you to do all you can to inform yourself on architectural design by gathering tons of photos you like and perhaps reading/skimming a book like "A Field Guide to American Houses" by the McAlesters, or checking out a few books on architecture from the library, and then vetting your architect through their website and as many in-person interviews as you and your partner can afford time-wise, or just until you find one that you feel is really someone that understands your vision and personality and responds very well to your questions with suggestions, feedback, etc. indicating that they can readily fulfill your wishes.

Every architect has a unique work background, design interests and vision and set of skills, determined both by the personality of the architectural program where they studied, their own intellectual and personal motivations and the offices they chose to work in over the years, etc!

I say this simply b/c _I_ have personally found it really hard to hire and work with an architect both times we have done it!
Like building a home and working with a GC, it is a lengthy process of give and take, so finding someone who has a portfolio demonstrating they can design in a style that you like AND that can understand you and respond well to your likes and dislikes, is vitally important to a pleasant and successful relationship.

Finally, they have to be on the same wavelength technically as you: do you have an ecological tendencies, are you interested in a specific technology for building your home?

Good luck (and enjoy)!

Before working with our architect I marked many, many photos of houses I found appealing, and then tried to whittle things down from there. Your architect can help with this; don't feel that you need to know exactly what your house should look like before you hire her/him. The images I marked were very different, though our architect was able to find some common themes, and came up with something great for us.

Sounds like you are still collecting images, so here are few I had marked on Houzz that are of the contemporary white farmhouse type. Good luck!

{{gwi:2133168}}

[Farmhouse Exterior[(https://www.houzz.com/photos/farmhouse-exterior-home-ideas-phbr1-bp~t_736~s_2114) by Burlington Architects & Building Designers TruexCullins Architecture + Interior Design

{{gwi:2133169}}

[Transitional Exterior[(https://www.houzz.com/photos/transitional-exterior-home-ideas-phbr1-bp~t_736~s_2112) by Seattle Architects & Building Designers Dan Nelson, Designs Northwest Architects

[Traditional Exterior[(https://www.houzz.com/photos/traditional-exterior-home-ideas-phbr1-bp~t_736~s_2107) by Greenville Interior Designers & Decorators Linda McDougald Design : Postcard from Paris Home

{{gwi:2133170}}

[Farmhouse Exterior[(https://www.houzz.com/photos/farmhouse-exterior-home-ideas-phbr1-bp~t_736~s_2114) by Austin Architects & Building Designers Tim Cuppett Architects