Thanks for the input. We have it narrowed down to two, both of whom charge hourly. One is more expensive than the other, but we like the houses she's designed in the past better, as they seem to have more interesting and unique features, customized to the individual clients. Her natural style also seems to be closer to our own. She also uses technology to mock up interiors, which I find helpful since I'm not good at visualizing 3D space on my own. The other is a one-woman shop, more old school (she hand draws tile diagrams, for example), and with a natural style a little different from our own. I get the sense she's very good at good, solid basic design and could work with our style, but less creative. She's very practical and down-to-earth, though, which we like. We're actually right on the border in terms of using a designer or not - we have a pretty strong sense of our own style, likes, and dislikes, and we're actually looking to replicate a lot in our current home. In some ways this would be a good fit for the more basic designer, as I could do a lot of it myself and likely use her a bit less. On the other hand, with her I don't know how much added value I'm really getting beyond what I'd come up with myself. While the more creative designer will be more expensive, I also think I'm more likely to end up with something better than what I could do myself. Decisions decisions.

You can't pick paint until your house is built, and you can sample large swatches in your house in all different light conditions. What looks good on the tiny paint swatch or on a computer/phone pic may not look good in your home. Pick things in the order your builder asks... windows, exterior doors, and roof will probably be your first big choices. Keep in mind what your exterior will be, though. Interior paint is one of the last things to consider. We are six months into our build and were just asked to pick paint last week. We've already selected cabinets/cabinet color, countertops, tile, etc. IMO, the bones of the house and making good choices for those items are more important that decorative finishes.

Are you looking for floor tiles or backsplash or? What are your other materials? Can you post pictures of the space?

@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.