Brought to you by ArtDeadline.Com
The best way to put the difference is philosophy. Quality of stylized elements and principals are not greater or lesser in either form, but are weighted differently.
The idea I see in fine arts is that every aspect of the piece can be weighted equally when critiqued. This means stylized strokes in one are as valuable of the process an other took to make. To be edgy, I see those artists oriented to the fine arts place the concept of elements and principals over how they fit together. A concentration may not be a narrative, I have just recently found out. Commonly, fine art pieces stand alone, only related by the creator. I don't disagree with any of these ideas, but I do not associate.
When I think of illustration, I think of at least half the weight being put on the concept of the scene portrayed. The reason many illustrations are hard to understand without others, I feel, is because there is a deeper context behind them. Sometimes that can't be read within just the piece and I don't see that as bad. I feel that the philosophy of illustration opens many doors for a larger project, for which all pieces will eventually fit. That's how my book was written: through years of refining the symbols I drew so they fit together. It opens the door when a concept is drawn. Say an illustrator draws a strange beast crossing a plain. It opens the door to elaborate: what does it eat? how does it act? who's there to see it or what, for that matter? What preys on it and what crosses it's path? If all these questions are visually answered, we now see through the looking glass of a new world, and can expand on that further. Maybe there's something beyond what we've created or maybe, a detail within that could let us interact better with this world.