I did some conversions from RAW format to TIFF and JPEG (at several different quality settings) with three different programs (QU, Irfanview, and Photoshop) and I notice that the JPEGs from QU with the highest quality setting are much larger than with the other programs.  Here is a table of results (file sizes in kb):

                       QU          Irfanview         (Photoshop)
TIFF                 26,450    26,448             26,765
JPG-100 (12)    11,858    5,736               6,113
JPG-90 (11)      2,277      1,533               2,571
JPG-80 (10)      1,462      957                  1,406

While at the lower quality settings, the file sizes are about the same (1-2.5 Mb), at the highest quality setting the QU JPEG is twice as large as the other two.  TIFFS are approximately the same size, so why such big JPEGS from QU with the quality set at "100"?

MelW hit the nail on the head.  Because the filter file (.flw) is linked to the image, you can't have different filter files for a single image in a given folder.

If you still have your Win 7 files (or even a computer with XP), you might try running/copying the old FREECELL.EXE (in Windows/System32) and see if it works.

I see no reason why you couldn't use dye ink, but be sure to flush out any pigment ink in the printhead before connecting the CISS, perhaps with a set of cleaning cartridges or some distilled water in the dampers themselves when you first hook it up.  I've converted a couple of Epson pigment-ink printers (C86/88 and NX400) to refillable carts and use dye ink because the printers are used for everyday printing.  I've had no issues with either.  I still use pigment ink in my R2000, but that one is reserved for my photo printing.

The only other thing you have to take into account is that you'll probably need to make custom printer profiles for the different papers that you use.  If you're not striving for artistic perfection and archival longevity, then the savings in ink cost, not to mention the lessened likelihood of clogged heads, would argue in favor of dye inks.  Some of the newer ones have much better longevity than those available previously.

What settings did you use when you printed the target?  They have to be the same when you print using the PP profile.

So when I logged in again just now I clicked "Show unread posts since last visit" in the upper left, which is what I normally do when I log on, and it didn't show your post Fred, even though it was an unread post since my last visit.  I then clicked the "Click here to read all unread posts" and it still didn't come up.  I only noticed that you had replied because the icon at the left of the Forum was darkened (indicating an unread post).  Indeed you had replied, but for some reason it wasn't getting picked up.  Is there something in my browser that's not configured correctly?  I'm pretty sure I have cookies enabled for the site.  It used to work, so I don't know what's changed.

Am I missing something or have there been no new posts in the last week or so?

Depending on how soon you need a printer, you might want to reconsider whether a dedicated photo printer is out of your price range.  Although they are out of stock right now, the Epson website offers refurbished R2000 printers for $349.  When I bought mine, they also had a $100 rebate, bringing the price down to $249, which is very similar to the going price for the Canon iP8720.  Just something to think about.  The link to the R2000 refurb is:

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Product.do?sku=C11CB35201-N

Your post above shows the Epson Twain interface, so I responded based on that.  I don't use Vuescan so I can't answer your question.  The Epson Twain interface worked fine for me, but I have moved to ColorMunki, so I don't use PP anymore.

I've always gotten the best results by using "Color Control" rather than "No Color Correction" in the Epson Twain Driver (Ver 3.45A).  I have an Epson Perfection 1250 scanner and found that I have to play around with the black and white sliders in the Histogram Adjustment to get the best results (see first snap below).  I'm not at the computer that I used to use, but I think the values were somewhere around 10-15 for black and 240-245 for white.  It's pretty much trial and error, scan the IT8, bring it into PP, set the corners, let it chug away, then evaluate the resultant histogram for low- and high-end clipping (try to minimize the heights of the red bars; second snap below).  Once the optimal values have been determined, I save the setup in the Twain interface so that I can recall those settings for subsequent scans of IT8 with printed target.

Yea, I figured that.  What has me puzzled is why when the cutout is applied to an un-rotated image (lower right in snap 2) does the dropshadow go toward the upper right instead of the lower right?  The shadow on the cutout (snap 1) goes to the lower right.

For some reason when I apply the cutout (Drop Shadow (5crp).frame.tif, see 1st snap) to an image, the dropshadow is toward the upper right (see lower right image of 2nd snap), whereas the cutout has the dropshadow toward the lower right.  If I rotate an image, add it to the queue, and then apply the cutout, it comes out right (2nd snap, upper left image, shadow to lower right).

Any idea what might be causing this?  Is there a way to control the rotation of the cutout independently of image rotation?  Do I just need to make 4 separate cutouts, each rotated 90 degrees and apply the one that gives the desired dropshadow orientation?

A blue glass filter, or acetate sheet filter, will also increase the contrast of the yellow lines.

Thanks Mike.   

I made scanner and camera profiles with PP V6.5 several years ago.  Would profiles made with PP 8.43 from the same target scan/images be any different?  In other words, does the ICC profile generation algorithm in 8.43 apply to scanner/camera profiles, or is it just for printer profiles?