Why Laser Coding is Replacing CIJ for Product Marking and Traceability

Packaging Technology Today: Today, we’re exploring a key question for many in the manufacturing and packaging industries: Why is laser growing so fast as a marking technology against continuous inkjet? Here to help us break it all down is Gary Bolton, Senior Product Manager at Matthews Marking Systems with extensive experience in industrial marking technologies and laser marking. Gary, we talked last August about Laser Marking in Modern Manufacturing and this time we’re looking forward to digging a little deeper.  Thanks for joining us again.

Gary Bolton: Thanks for having me. It’s an exciting time in coding and marking, and I’m happy to dive into the details.

Packaging Technology Today: Let’s jump right in. Continuous inkjet (CIJ) is the marking technology of choice for over 40% of the consumer-packaged goods market. Why are we seeing more companies switching to laser coding instead of traditional CIJ?

Gary Bolton: Great question. One of the main reasons is the need for permanent, tamper-resistant marks. In industries like pharmaceuticals, consumer products, and food and beverage, traceability is crucial, and counterfeit prevention is a huge concern. Laser marking either ablates, engraves or has a chemical reaction with the desired product & its surface, making them much more durable compared to CIJ ink, which can be removed or smudged.

Packaging Technology Today: So, permanence is a big factor. Are there other benefits to laser coding compared to CIJ?

Gary Bolton: Absolutely. Beyond permanence, lasers also provide higher quality and more precise marks, which is critical for detailed information like barcodes, QR codes, and alphanumeric sequences. Plus, laser systems are virtually maintenance-free compared to CIJ. With CIJ, you must deal with frequent ink and solvent refills, not to mention the regular maintenance needed to keep the printhead working smoothly. Lasers don’t require consumables like ink, which can lead to significant cost savings over time.

Packaging Technology Today: Speaking of costs, many people assume lasers are more expensive upfront. Is that true, and how do the long-term costs compare?

Gary Bolton: It’s true that lasers typically have a higher initial cost compared to lower-end CIJ printers. But when you factor in ongoing expenses—like ink, solvents, and maintenance—lasers end up being more cost-effective, especially for high-speed, high-volume production lines. CIJ printers need constant refilling and maintenance, which really adds up. With lasers, you don’t have those recurring consumable costs, and maintenance is minimal, which translates to lower total cost of ownership over time.

Packaging Technology Today: That’s interesting. Let’s talk about versatility. How do these two technologies compare when it comes to different materials and applications?

Gary Bolton: Both technologies are versatile, but they have their strengths. CIJ is great for a wide range of substrates and has good throw distance, meaning it can print effectively on curved or uneven surfaces—like bottles or pipes. However, it has its challenges with certain inks, especially pigmented ones, which can clog the printhead. Laser, on the other hand, works well on coated paper, plastics, rubber, and even glass. It’s perfect for applications that require cleanliness, like food or pharmaceuticals, since it’s contaminant-free. Plus, throw distance isn’t an issue with laser since the marks are made by direct contact of the laser beam with the surface.

Packaging Technology Today: It sounds like laser is also a cleaner option. Are there any other environmental benefits?

Gary Bolton: Definitely. Laser systems are much more environmentally friendly. Since there are no inks or solvents involved, you eliminate the waste and the potential for ink contamination, which is a big plus for companies focused on sustainability. Laser coding helps keep recyclable packaging truly recyclable, without the worry of ink affecting the process.

Packaging Technology Today: It seems like laser has a lot going for it. But are there situations where CIJ is still the better choice?

Gary Bolton: CIJ and other inkjet technologies still have their place, especially for applications where laser marking isn’t feasible—like when you need to mark extremely curved or irregular surfaces. Inkjet is also a go-to for simple “use by” or “sell by” codes where permanence isn’t critical. But for companies that need high-resolution, permanent marks, and want to reduce maintenance and consumable costs, laser is the better choice.

Packaging Technology Today: For companies considering making the switch, what’s your advice?

Gary Bolton: I’d say take a close look at your current marking needs and think about your long-term goals. If you’re aiming for more durable marks, lower operational costs, and a cleaner production process, laser is definitely worth considering. It might cost a bit more upfront, but the long-term savings and performance are well worth it. And if anyone wants more information, we’re always ready to provide a consultation to help determine the best solution for their specific application. You can find us at MatthewsMarking.com.

Packaging Technology Today: Great insights, Gary. Thanks for breaking it all down for us today.

Gary Bolton: My pleasure. Thanks for having me.

Gary Bolton
Senior Product Manager: Laser