Craig touched on something I think is really worth a try.  If you record your direct out, try the ProChannel presets for acoustic guitars.  They are easy to get to if you have the channel inspector open.  Just click the Load Preset folder under the gain knob.  There are 15 Ac Guitar presets that will give you a great starting point.  Even though they have Gibson guitar model names, why not throw one on a Taylor?

RobWS
Craig touched on something I think is really worth a try.  If you record your direct out, try the ProChannel presets for acoustic guitars.  They are easy to get to if you have the channel inspector open.  Just click the Load Preset folder under the gain knob.  There are 15 Ac Guitar presets that will give you a great starting point.  Even though they have Gibson guitar model names, why not throw one on a Taylor?

Umm... That's freaking awesome! I never knew those were there. Will definitely try them all out later on.

I tried running direct and applying Craig's EQ setting from the Harmony Central article linked in an earlier post. I was actually pretty pleased with the sound, though it brought out the little "fingers on the strings" artifacts a little more than I'd like (fingerpicked piece). Next step is to blend it with the (still pretty crappy) mic'd signal, but I have some other placements I need to try.

You might try recording direct and then using an impulse response to change the sound to be more pleasant. They only cost a few dollars also. Check them out here

https://youtu.be/v4ob9Qn8uH4

I did a video on them myself, but I used an electric guitar, so it doesn't sound as good. You'll get better results out of an acoustic with a piezo.

https://youtu.be/q-4lCvG-V-o

So... here's what I ended up doing.  I'm super-happy with the sound on the fingerpicked piece I've been working on, but I'm sure I'd have to seriously alter some of these settings if I were strumming with a pick.
Anyhow...
 
I simultaneously recorded two tracks of the Taylor, one direct into the Focusrite and the other mic'd with an AudioTechnica large diaphragm condenser pointed right where the neck meets the body at about a 12 inch distance.  I then copied the direct track to two other tracks and then muted the original.  To one of the direct tracks I applied the exact EQ settings from Craig's Harmony Central article referenced earlier, to the other I applied one of the J45 Prochannel presets (Natural Strumming, I think).  I didn't process the mic'd track at all.  By itself, that track isn't great.  A little too ambient still, mushy, unfocused, choose your adjective.  But when blended into the two EQd direct tracks it adds a nice bit of life and presence that's hard to define.  I mixed these three tracks down to one and panned it 80% left.  I then copied this to another track, applied Craig's AcousticPiezo amp with some slightly altered settings, panned 80% right, and nudged forward 30 ms.  To each track I then applied a little CA2A compression, tube saturation, and the A Series console emulator with the drive kicked up a bit. 
 
I know it's a bit of work, and purists would probably rightfully scream than one should just be able to get a perfect sound using one of the common stereo mic techniques.  And yes, I guess I do have six differently effected copies of the exact same original performance, all playing at once.  But I'll be darned if it doesn't sound great to my ears.  And I think it was Joe Meek that said "if it sounds right, it is right."
 
Sorry for the lengthy post, but just wanted to say thanks for all the great suggestions, and hopefully my solution can provide some ideas or inspiration for someone out there.  Take care!

With acoustics I always record three or even more sources. It increases the odds of good outcome.

With classical guitar, I record with one properly placed mic to avoid phase issues. I then create a stereo image by splitting the track into three tracks. One is lowpassed and panned mostly left, one is highpassed and panned mostly right, and the middle has the frequencies not covered by what's in the left and right channels. This sounds like the guitarist is sitting in front of you because the body boom is off to the left, the neck/string noises to the right, and the rest in the middle. It sounds very realistic and the notes ring out well because there are no cancellations. 
 
Those are just the basics. For more details, check out this article and scroll down to the section called "Virtual Mics with Parallel EQ."

If you can, as a suggestion along with one or more microphones, use something like the L-R Baggs Para-acoustic DI and record on another channel. This has always been a winner for me and a bunch of folks. Works with a wide variety of pick-ups.

Anderton touched briefly on signal cancellations, something you mostly want to avoid. Definitely in this circumstance.

Hang in there.. .the most important thing is, the more you record, the more experience you gain, the better you find out what works for your environment..

Happy hunting!!!

Just to throw one more opinion or two into the mix...
 
How you record an acoustic guitar depends very much on the role the guitar is playing in the song.
 
Often, acoustic guitar is on a track more as a rhythm instrument than as a tonal instrument. In that case, you'll probably end up putting on a high pass filter and running it WAY up until most of what you hear from the guitar is the pick contacting the strings. In an extreme case like that, a direct in might work fine. 
 
On the other hand, if the acoustic guitar features as the main instrument (or one of two or three), you want a full-range, rich sound. There may be a way to get that using a direct mic, but I've never come anywhere close. Four techniques that I've found to work are:
 
1. for a stereo sound, use a large diaphragm condenser mic pointing somewhere near the 12th fret, and a figure 8 mic (like a ribbon) with the two poles pointing left and right. Then you can make a copy of the track with the figure 8 mic, reverse the polarity of the copy, and pan the original track and the copy hard left and right. Group the two tracks with the figure 8 mic. If you turn the figure 8 mics up and the LDC down, you get an enormous stereo field, which can be pretty dramatic. Vice versa, you get close to mono.
 
2. (mono) a small diaphragm condensor pointing right down at the side of the guitar above the upper bout. The guitarist has to to be careful about breathing and mouth noises, but this can get a very sweet sound.
 
3. (mono) A large scale condenser at about the 12th fret, about 18" from the guitar, angled toward the sound hole to taste (the more angle, the more bass), together with a small diaphragm condenser or a ribbon mic pointing at the end of the guitar (the surface with strap peg on it). I've found that the recording from the end of the guitar sounds bad on its own, but mixed in with the LDC it adds body and realism.
 
4. (mono) The old classic, which is 3. without the mic on the end of the guitar.
 
Choice of guitar makes a huge difference. I've done side by side comparisons between three Martins I have. One is a rosewood dreadnought, one is a rosewood OM, and the third is a mahogany/spruce 000. The 000, which cost a fraction of what the other two cost, is hands down the winner every time. Not even close. All that bass and resonance sounds wonderful when playing in a room, but for recording a small mahogany guitar sounds more clear and balanced.
 
One other thing... If you're going to have a highly processed sound, e.g. lots of chorus, phasing, whatever, it really doesn't much matter how you record the guitar. Try whatever gets you closest to the sound you had in your head once you get all the effects on. 
 
 
 
 

Awesome suggestions, thanks!