What makes paper "fine art paper"?

[Chakonari]

I've been trying to find out if there is a clear differentiation between "normal" photo paper and "fine art" paper. I mean what's the difference between (non-textured) regular glossy inkjet paper and glossy fine art paper. (Or cheap matte and fine art matte)

I'm not asking about the obvious, i.e. that I should be able to expect a better looking print on better paper, but the actual physical/chemical differences.

The only things I have been able to find out are: Fine art paper costs more, and textured papers and canvas are generally found under the "fine art" category. Matte, satin and glossy can be found in both regular inkjet and fine art.

Are all papers from manufacturers like Hahnemhle, Ilford and Innova fine art papers? Reading the descriptions on the manufacturers' and suppliers sites has not help with categorising paper. Or is there no clear line but just a grey area and anybody can use the term "fine art paper" to make people pay extra?

Side note: The reason I asked myself this, is that I'm trying to understand why the Canon Pixma Pro printers enforce a 35mm border at the start and end of prints when the fine art setting is used.

 

[rodbam]

Canon say they consulted photographers about the borders on fine art prints & the consensus was they all like a 35mm border around fine art prints. This seems a bit daft to me as I want to pick the border I like not what other photographers like. I found an easy work around for this when I used the Canon A3+ size Fine Art Premium Matte paper by using the Canon Matte paper profile & I couldn't see any difference in the final print from the fine art matte profile with enforced 35mm borders.
The only thing I can think of as to why some papers are called "Fine Art" is the texture of the paper being made a part of the look of the final print & should be displayed naked & not behind glass so the textures can be appreciated by the viewer. Maybe cheap matte paper wouldn't print as good a detail as fine art paper because of the better coatings on fine art paper & plus it does sound good if you can say to people you print on Hahnemhle dirty rag rather than the common old glossy

 

[fotofreek]

Rod - beyond the preference of photographers, fine arts graphic prints always show a border. If a framer foolishly cuts the border off of your Miro or Picasso signed print when framing it, the value may be considerably diminshed. I have a few much lower valued silk screen prints that I bought many years ago. I looked up the current value recently, and the quoted value had a caveat that it was full size and the border had not been trimmed. I don't think that any of my inkjet prints, whether on fine arts papers or otherwise, would be valued differently with or without a border!

 

[rodbam]

Thanks Foto The prints do look a lot nicer with the 35mm border I agree but you would think Canon would give us the choice, I don't think Epson pre determines the borders on fine art prints. I'm very new to all the different ways & papers for displaying prints & at my age now I'm happy with just using Gloss & semi gloss & display them behind glass. If I was younger I would be right in to investigating all the different papers & ways of displaying prints.

 

[Chakonari]

@ rodbam: Thanks for your thoughts on the paper in general, my thoughts were similar. I guess the result depends on the paper as well as the printer settings. I don't recall which papers were used, but I do remember reading elsewhere, that some people just couldn't get the same results when attempting to print borderless.

The borders could also be related to how the paper is fed and what happens to the paper near the printhead, when it's at the end and hanging out one side. I recall one printer review(don't remember for whihc printer or which site), where the reviewer had placed a book on the paper tray to make sure the paper remained plane during printing - this apparently helped with problems in the print quality at the end of the print. The Hat (forum member) has mentioned that the Pixma Pro 9500 MK II borders are only an issue when using the front feed.

Thanks for your thoughts on the paper in general, my thoughts were similar.

@ fotofreek: I prefer borders too. However when printing fine art cards, I feel that the 35mm border at the start and end of the print can be too much. Imho, the border should be a matter of choice from 0 to ??mm. That aside, what do you think about a passe-partout for framing?

But the real question still is, is the term "Fine Art Paper" something that has a clear definition? .... and is it also a misused marketing term?

 

[hceuterpe]

I'm sure plenty of manufacturers would say 'the price".

I think there are some other considerations like whether the ink used is considered "archival" grade and is marketed as such. Fine art would not be fine art if the color faded. Also I thought I remember that matte was preferred by many over glossy. I wonder if it has to do with being framed behind glass and I think the preferred light is halogen, which is quite intense with a high color temperature. Glossy could introduce undesired reflections maybe?

 

[rodbam]

I've just started using Ilford Gallerie Smooth Pearl & I really like the look of it when printed. The other thing I like about it is Ilford suggests we use the Photo Paper Pro 11 paper setting which makes this a perfect combination on my pro9000 because with this paper setting the printer will be using the red & green ink tanks for hopefully a better colour range.

 

[hceuterpe]

rodbam: It seems like the paper names are more akin to the paper thickness/weight. The Kirkland, HP PP, and The Ilford are about the same mass/weight and it seems like the proper setting for all three is the Paper Pro/Plus.

Does that sound right to you?