Comparative Assessment of Various Toner Types and Its Impact on Print-Edge Quality in Electrophotographic Printing Presses

Bijender; Manish Kaushik; Ankit Boora

doi:10.69968/ijisem.2026v5i3124-130

Authors

Bijender Assistant Professor, Department of Printing Technology, GJUS&T, Hisar
Manish Kaushik M. Tech. Scholar, Department of Printing Technology, GJUS&T, Hisar
Ankit Boora Assistant Professor, Department of Printing Technology, GJUS&T, Hisar

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69968/ijisem.2026v5i3124-130

Keywords:

Electrophotographic Printing, Silk Coated Paper, NTR Paper, Uncoated Paper, Textured Paper, EA Toner, Emulsion Aggregation (EA) Toner, Polymerized Toner, Pulverized Toner, Print-Edge Sharpness.

Abstract

Print-Edge sharpness is one of the most important parameters for evaluating print quality in electrophotographic printing because it directly influences image clarity, text readability and the overall visual appearance of printed products. The present study investigates the influence of toner technology and paper substrate on Print-Edge sharpness through a comparative assessment of three commercially available toner types, namely Emulsion Aggregation (EA) toner, Polymerized toner and Pulverized toner. The study was conducted using four commonly used printing substrates: Silk Coated paper, Textured paper, Uncoated paper and NTR paper. Test prints were printed under controlled electrophotographic printing conditions to ensure consistency in machine settings and environmental parameters.

Print-Edge sharpness was evaluated and quantified using standard human observer method by measuring the edge definition of printed characters and graphical elements. The comparative analysis examined the interaction between toner characteristics and substrate surface properties, including coating, roughness and absorbency and their influence on edge reproduction. EA toner and Polymerized toner generally produced sharper and more well-defined print edges than Pulverized toner, particularly on coated paper such as Silk Coated Paper. In contrast, textured and uncoated substrates exhibited relatively lower edge sharpness because of their higher surface roughness and greater toner spread. NTR paper showed intermediate performance depending on the toner formulation employed.

The findings indicate that both toner technology and substrate characteristics play a critical role in determining Print-Edge sharpness in electrophotographic printing. The study provides valuable insights for selecting suitable toner–paper combinations to optimize print quality and enhance image fidelity in commercial digital printing applications. The outcomes contribute to the understanding of material interactions in electrophotographic printing and provide a scientific basis for improving print quality through appropriate toner and substrate selection.

References

[1] Bijender & Baral, A. K. (2023). Identification of print quality related problems and finding possible remedial measures in relation to the surface characteristics of cellulosic substrates used in dry toner based digital printing presses. GJUS&T, Hisar. 20-55.

[2] Babaie, B., Najafi, M., & Ataeefard, M. (2024). Designing an optimised formulation for in situ emulsion polymerization: Printing ink production by response surface methodology. Pigment & Resin Technology. https://doi.org/10.1108/PRT-10-2023-0091

[3] Bijender, Bhambhu, V., & Boora, A. (2026). Comparative evaluation of Print-Edge sharpness of office-based and production-based electrophotographic printing systems. International Journal of Innovations in Science, Engineering and Management.

[4] Carlson, C. F. (1938). Electrophotography (U.S. Patent No. 2,297,691).

[5] International Organization for Standardization. (2001). ISO 13660:2001—Measurement of image quality attributes for hardcopy output.

[6] Kipphan, H. (Ed.). (2001). Handbook of Print Media: Technologies and Production Methods. Springer.

[7] Kumar, S., & Kumar, S. (2024). Comparative study of ΔE on different label stock on digital dry toner electrophotography and inkjet digital printing technique. International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering, 12(4), 1035–1042.

[8] Romano, F. J. (1999). Digital Printing. Prentice Hall.

[9] Schaffert, R. M. (1975). Electrophotography. Focal Press.

[10] Schleusener, M., & Apel, R. (1997). The influence of toner and paper properties on electrophotographic print quality. IS&T Proceedings.

[11] Schein, L. B. (1996). Electrophotography and Development Physics. Springer.

[12] Sonmez, S., Engin, M., Li, K., & Salam, A. (2024). Analysing the impact of paper grammage and pulp blend on electrophotographic printing systems. Coloration Technology, 140(5), 793–804.

[13] Szen R., & Borbély, Á. (2023). Quality of electrophotographic prints on foil substrates. Journal of Graphic Engineering and Design, 14(2), 1–7.

[14] Williams, R. S., & Pulley, T. (2002). Electronic Publishing and Digital Printing.

[15] Dessauer, J. H., & Clark, H. E. (1965). Xerography and Related Processes. Focal Press.

[16] Kado, S., Kudo, K., & Sakai, M. (2024). High-resolution printing of various electronic