In the summer of 1974 i worked at a small airport as a ramp tramp in the maintenance shop. I changed lots of oil in lots of small planes. Most didn't have a filter but rather a fairly coarse screen that might stop fine sand. I asked the head mechanic why no filter. He said dirty oil under pressure beats clean oil with no pressue. Lame way to say a screen is more reliable than a paper filter. Same for fuel. Most small planes didn't have a paper filter but rather a screen filter
Almost any device/system that separates material can be described as a filter. Just because one is course and another fine, does not change this.
Some gauze filters (screens) will separate down to 50 micron or better.
Not all "paper" /media style will go this low, many will go lower .
The type/design of filter is dictated by the liquid, material you want removed and the flow rate required.
In general gauze filters can be cleaned and are easily checked for material build up (blockage).
On the other hand media/paper style are usually pleated (folded) to increase surface area and are almost impossible to monitor & clean (there are exceptions).
Pleated media style are usually replaced (disposable) at fixed service intervals, well before they unduly restrict liquid flow.
Gauze filters have the reputation of not breaking down. Pleated paper style the opposite. It's likly that the breakdown reputation is due to low quality filters being used.
Note:
Not all filters use a (physical) screen/media. There are centrifugal, weight, vibration, oil bath and settling systems, etc
Most physical/barrier type systems will actually deliver better filtration over time ie as they block up so separation improvises.
All physical systems reduce flow rate. As they block, flow is further reduced. Eventually flow will be completly blocked.
There are many examples of combination filter systems eg Centrifugal & Pleated Media Air Filters
