I don't mean to scare you. When I read your original post, it sounds like you had a vision near the bottom where you itemized 1-4. One and two sound like you had a comfortable direction. The post seemed like you worked together with the landscaper to form a "vision" and then started implementing it. It now sounds like it was much looser than that, so there is a difference and with that difference there is reason to believe that you can have better results. You asked if I am a design professional. I am a registered landscape architect. "However, you scare me a little bit, Laag....as a novice gardener I wouldn't expect that the execution would be immensely difficult. Depressing to think that a lovely plan on paper could be spoiled in the brown-thumb hands of the wrong person." Implementation of landscape plans is actually highly variable. A layout plan of plant placement may not be that way so much, but you have a lot more in the mix than plant placement. You have topographic changes which brings a third dimension that spurs off a number of other issues. Sticking to just the aesthetic parts of those issues, you have the steps, terracing, retaining walls, and how the elevations affect how the plants visually interact (which is very different than if they are in a flat plan). A very good design can be drawn that takes all of this into account. But having that good design does not get you out of the woods just yet. The execution is very dependent on the ability of the person to layout the plan. It is much more difficult to do on varying terrain. That is not really easy for people who do it all of the time and is quite difficult for someone who has never done it. That is an area where a good plan can be horribly compromised in the implementation. Let's say that both the design is good and the layout is done accurately. Now we have the sculpting of the terrain to deal with. This is not easily drawn on a small scale plan with contour lines and very difficult for inexperienced people to convert from lines on a piece of paper to the actual contour of the ground, so a lot may be left up to the person doing the work to try and make it work. Let's say that is done well. Now you have the actual construction of the steps. You may have some well drawn construction details that show you what needs to be done, but a lot of garden designer's are not experienced in drawing up construction details and the added ability, time, and liability would drive the design cost up. But let's say the designer has provided good construction details. You still need the skill set to build them. Some things are fairly simple to do such as forming and pouring concrete. But putting together a stone wall takes more than being able to read a construction detail. It takes real skill. It is true that a not all walls have to be masonry masterpieces, but there is a point where rustic crosses the line to crude. Crude will detract from the intent of the plan. Let's say that the skill set to build the walls and steps are good. Now we can move toward planting. A #5 Nikko Blue Hydrangea might be called for on the plan. If you call three nurseries and have them each ship you one, will they all be the same? I can tell you that it is unlikely that they will be based on my own experience. This means that selection of a nursery can impact the implementation. Let's say you have found a good nursery. Now, plants are living things and they are handled at nurseries. This means there are variations from one plant to another. Someone has to know which plants are the healthiest, the right shape, and otherwise the best choice for this particular job. This does not mean that any other #5 Nikko Blue is not going to work, but it does mean that it adds a quality variation in implementing the plan. Let's say that we are able to do this very well. Our land form is shaped, steps and walls are well laid out and well crafted, and our beautiful plants are on site. Now there is the digging of the holes. Some will make them bigger and some will make them smaller. Some will amend and some won't. Some will amend with xyz and some with abc. Some will bury them 2/3 and then water them in and finish burying them after the water subsides. Others won't water them in at all. So, yes, implementation of a plan can take a great plan and turn it into a lousy landscape. ... or not.

"Startling lack of reading material, though I guess that is not surprising when her use of books is solely decorative." We don't have many books but I read a TON. My reading is either library books, which are in nightstand drawers or baskets in the living room, or I read on a Kindle or iPad. My husband doesn't read at home because he reads so much for work and he also works 60+ hours a week. Sadly, he just doesn't get pleasure out of reading at home these days. I hope no one would come into our home and assume something negative about us because they don't see loads of books. "I didn't know until reading this thread, that they have no TV--it seems to me that to say, "We're too busy, smart, morally superior, etc., to watch TV, but support us by watching our TV show," is the height of hypocrisy. Sorry if that's too negative." The TV thing came up during an interview (in BHG or Country Living Magazine or similar), when they were asked if their family watched their own show. They said they don't watch their own show at home because they don't have a TV. They didn't go into their reasons for not having one. I don't think not having a TV makes them morally superior, even if they do have a TV show. Because they have a show, they must now start watching TV?? That seems sort of silly, doesn't it? I don't know them, and I don't currently watch their show, although I saw the first season. I think it's surprising and a little sad that this group continues to bash them week after week. Hasn't it pretty much all been said?

Haven't we all had our personal idea of our 'dream home', especially when we were younger? The Gaines were not wealthy when they came to HGTV, and with 4 kids, may have been 'making do' with Joanna's clever style, and repurposing of wood, and various thrift store items. IMO, this may have been their dream home, very traditional in style, and quite possibly may never have envisioned it being theirs some day. They may surprise everyone by only doing a few upgrades, and NOT painting everything white. I feel Joanna knows where and when to draw the line on that as all the houses they've redone have been fixer uppers, and not stately homes needing very little.

I think that whole look has jumped the shark. It all looks the same, as so many of her houses do. It's mostly white, turquoise, with weathered woods and black iron accents. The look is still prevalent in the mid-market level, but I'm starting to see some changes at the industry level. Indigo shades are big now, and warmer tones are being desired. I see a lot of deeper paint shades in the shelter publications, and brown leather sofas are still being purchased. I've seen the Magnolia furniture line in person. It's ok, perfectly fine, but not fantastic. Expense is relative to the person making the purchase, but I don't think it's expensive, though I'm sure the name is factored in. It's not furniture that I would call forever furniture, but then that's not what the new buying generation wants. So I would say that she has given the market what it wants; her look at a price affordable enough that you wouldn't mind passing it on and buying something new in a few years.