Posted By:
davidcyclebackBelow linked is a brief article about photo 'originals' 'printed later' etc.
http://www.cycleback.com/photoguide/importantconcepts.html
I'm greatly partial to vintage originals, but as indicated in the article, limited edition original printed later photos by the photographers can have financial value. And a giant second generation photo made to be hung at Yankee Stadium can have financial value as an artifact and display piece.
In photograph collecting, the image is a key. As with OJs and T206s, you want the image to be its best. For me, that includes the greatest detail possible only from the original negative. It's no fun looking at a badly developed or out of focus photo (especially when you paid a lot). While not vintage, an original printed later photo can have all the original detail and qualities as it's printed from the original negative. I recently visited the Seattle Art Museum and they had original printed later photos of John Barrymore and James Cagney by George Hurrell. Each was signed and limited edition numbered on front by the Hurrell. Examples of 'printed later' photos in the permanent collection of a museum that owns paintings by Pollack, Rothko, Picasso, Renoir.
There are quality originals that are intentionally blurry, grainy or otherwise distorted. As a sports example, a SI photographer might want an blurred auction shot of Wayne Gretzky skating down the ice. The blurriness might add to the artistic quality and sense of movement. There's a difference between this and Aunt Jane's out of focus, heads cropped Polaroid at the family picnic.