Floor Plan Co-Determination - Architect vs. Client

Hello everyone,
I have already read something in this forum and would like to read your opinion on the above question regarding the (co-)determination of the floor plan by architects.
The following situation:
I am planning to build a house and have designed it using a freely available 3D house planning program. So there are simple plans about the interior walls, doors, room arrangement, room size, and windows. When I went to the preliminary discussion with the architect with my laptop (no contract signed yet), he smiled and said that we need to be careful not to clash over the plans: as an architect, he also has an artistic claim, and the house being built is a reference/advertisement for him. He also wants to take interior photos and be allowed to publish them. I may certainly express my ideas and wishes, but for example, he may want to decide on the straight alignment of various walls. If we want a floor plan created by us to be built as precisely as possible, we would be better off with a house-building company.
I do not want to overreach as a client, but my thought is that I am building the house, paying for it, and living in it. How the house is designed inside only concerns the architect in so far as he should meet my requirements, or—if I agree—design something according to my rough ideas.
On the other hand, one could also imagine that an architect is an artist and receives a commission from me to create a work of art (the house). It is therefore his product, whereby he considers my (rough) ideas. Sort of like a painting from a painter that is created as a commissioned work. I tell the painter that I want a vase with red tulips painted, but he decides the execution, the vase shape, the number and especially the arrangement of the tulips, etc.
Is the artistic claim of the architect described above OK and to be expected similarly from another architect, or can I normally give an architect exact plans and he only objects if it is technically unfeasible or senseless from a residential perspective?
I appreciate both variants described above, but I would like to know what is actually usual.
Thank you very much for your assessments!
Regards, Jersey

It is common to let the expert do the job. Or do you also tell your dentist how to treat your periodontitis?

He is right: builders without demands, just like his own amateurish quips, are well taken care of with a general contractor. I mean this without judgment and it does not mean that everyone who builds with a general contractor has no claims.

You can also give a call. But you have to expect that your possibly amateurish drawing will be adopted as is [emoji6]

He also has an artistic claim as an architect, and the house being built is a reference/advertisement for him. He also wants to take interior photos and be allowed to publish them. I can certainly express my ideas about what I want, but for example, he may want to decide about the straight alignment of various walls.

If the architect would rather drive a taxi and tell his passengers what a sophisticated artist he is than earn his living with houses for ordinary people, then you shouldn’t stand in the way of his detachment from reality and should give one of his many reasonable colleagues the chance that could have been his too. Eventually, Hollywood will call him. Be grateful that he revealed early on what kind of person he is. That is better than if you had only reached an agreement and later you wanted to move a wall and he did not, and then he would have found a judge who shared his view (that copyright outweighs the client’s interests). Apparently, such judges are not that rare.

And if I want to have a wall moved in my house, I do not release the plan. The architect can stand on his head and wiggle his legs.

But I initially agree with the architect, only his argumentation is worthless. He is the professional and ideally knows better what makes sense or is nonsense.

Experiences:
3 offices we work with.
1) They like to walk around in black rollnecks, drive Audis, office in an old villa. Aspiration to build something special. Unsuitable for standard stuff, too expensive for small jobs. Good for old listed buildings. Expertise 1a, respect for the construction achievements of past centuries. Craftsman connection in that direction.
2) Blue jeans, Ibiza shirt. White Mercedes. Lively appearance. Good for commercial buildings. Creative, good ideas, but somewhat chaotic. Bold in color design. Not completely without cost awareness.
3) Office in a single-family house. Drives an Opel. Craftsmen master milieu. Good for small jobs, conversions, certainly also single-family houses. Craftsmen love him because he’s down-to-earth: good tender participant. Keeps costs in mind. Willing to negotiate. We build what you want. Aesthetic advice, not aesthetic diktat.

There is a lid for every pot. Karsten

I am of the opinion that the floor plan must be developed together. As the client, you live in it and the house must suit you. The architect must consider feasibility and provide suggestions on how to optimize the whole thing.

I would look for another one. That does not fit.