When describing a print, when does one use the term "monotype", as opposed to the term "monoprint"?

these fundamentally mean the same thing -- a print that is pulled only once, and can't really be re-created. i think monotype is more technical.

This is a great question. Okay, there are some big differences between monotypes and monoprints. The main similarity is that each are printed the same way (either with a press or manually pressing paper against a prepared plate)

oh wait, there's more-

a monotype is technically produced by preparing a plate with etching ink and then removing/scratching into the ink where you want to lightness of the paper to show thorugh. you run that through a press and it prints, taking all of the ink with it. Its impossible to print it again, which is why its a monotype. With a monoprint you have a bit more freedom--they are often created by painting on a glass paint with oil paints and running that through the press. Often, a momprint will incorporate something textural that can be reused and a run of them can be done where they are all similar but unique--and thus you can't edition them.

Thanks for the answers! Interesting that nomtastic and mistermister have different responses. It makes me realize that my question was not simplistic!

It *is* a great question, and one that comes up frequently. If there is nothing on the plate used to make the print except for pigment, it's a monotype. If there are etched lines incised into the plate, or other textures and matrix adhered to it that can make repeatable impressions, then it's a monoprint. Even if the painting done on the plate changes each time the artist pulls a print, if there is element on the plate that will repeat, regardless of pigment manipulation, it's a monoprint.