What do you and your customers do with photographs - look at them or "feel" them? I thought photographs are to be looked at. Put them in a frame and what they "feel like" won't matter a tinkers-damn. The important things - at least to me - are DMax, neutrality, gamut and detail retention. On all those scores, Gold Fibre Silk is a a superb paper. Data on longevity from Wilhelm for HP printers and Aardenburg for some Epson printers give confidence those prints have good archival properties if treated correctly.
"for some Epson printers"...That's great if you're using an Epson. The OP was asking specifically about the z3200PS. Granted I'm using a z3100, but the Ilford Gold Fibre Silk looks terrible coming out of a z3100. Others have have also commented here about the failures of IGFS on the z3100 / z3200 in this regard.
Tactile qualities of photographic prints are pretty important to a few of my clients. One in particular, a fine art photographer who hired me to do some color printing, is what got me started researching baryta papers for the z3100 to begin with. I told him about and tried the IGFS, but he literally laughed and called it "garbage" when he touched it. I had to agree with him. When I first pulled a sheet out of a box I was immediately disappointed with the plastic, RC feel of the paper. This client is a published and collected fine art photographer (and a darn good one), but he prints all of his B&W work on fiber-base papers in a traditional darkroom. So, before sending a portfolio of prints to one of his clients in Italy, he wanted to try to find a true baryta paper that matches the look and, yes, "feel" of his B&W fiber prints for a few of his color images he wished to include. The Ilford Gold Fiber Silk fell so short of the mark it was laughable. My box I bought for testing was a complete waste of money. The stuff feels nothing like fiber-based baryta papers. It feels like plastic. He knew there would be no exact match, but he really didn't want the color prints to feel like plastic when his gallery was going through the box of prints. He wanted his color prints to match as closely as possible the look and feel of traditional fiber baryta paper. The Hahnemule baryta paper is vastly superior, almost a perfect match in tactile quality, both looking and feeling like a true fiber baryta paper. His image also looked better on the Hahnemule baryta. Of his photos we printed on both papers, there appeared to be much more depth and details in the shadows of his photos on the Hahnemule. If the Hahnemule wasn't so expensive I'm sure more of my client's would use it.
My review of the Ilford Gold Fiber Silk stands: on my z3100, it doesn't even look as good to me as the HP Prem ID Satin. Even if the stuff didn't feel like plastic I would not recommend this paper on the z3100 when there are better options out there. YMMV, especially on another printer.
For my own work I've found my favorite paper to be HP Premium ID Satin. The tactile qualities don't matter for most of my personal work, and B&W prints on the z on HP Prem ID Satin are outstanding.
Don't knock the concerns over tactile qualities of papers. The concerns may not matter for you, but the concerns are legit. Sometimes a photo has to pass muster in a stack of prints in a folio box to even make it into the frame and onto the wall of the gallery or client.
