Hi Graystar, Bruce, and others. I have run a number of additional tests and thought I would share. I have decided that the differences between Genuine Fractals, Qmage, and PSE (bicubic smoother) are so small for what "I am trying to do" that I am sticking with the PSE I already have. My goal was always maximizing the quality of old 3 MP images I have and trying to print them at 13 x 19. IMO, regardless of program, one is pushing it to the edge with those parameters anyway. If your goal is bigger prints, then you may have to do your own tests. I rank the programs in the order I just presented them in. BUT I feel that to see the differences between the 3, one must truly 'pixel peep' to see the variations. The print driver on my Canon 9500 does create pixelation if you do not take the image to 300 or 600 PPI youself. Even a 240 PPI image that I printed straight had some 'jaggies' added. What I have determined is that any image I have under 300 PPI is getting upsized to 300 PPI. Any image I have between 301 and 600, I am upsizing to 600 PPI which is native rez of Canon printer (Epson 720). I tested downsampling vs. up on a 450 PPI image (going to 300 and 600 resp.), and found upsizing was best. I still am not sure if print drivers actually use a cruder algorhythm like 'nearest neighbor' and upsize automatically or they just simply print what they got to work with straight, but either way, any of the above programs will cure you of seeing those individual pixels. I hope this helps someone else and could not have gotten here without intensive help from both Graystar and Bruce Oudekerk. Their extensive experience helped guide me to these results and saved me invaluable time and money (inks, papers, programs). Thanks again guys.