Surely, if having it resprayed (ie: no longer the original paint, so that consideration is out the window) you would at least want the best possible finish?
Non-original, poor-quality paintwork must logically be the worst possible combination of attributes.
I'm not sure...
bringing the car back to bare metal, and doing a full repaint as per (crappy) factory specification the car would end up being exactly as it left the factory: it would be indistinguishable from a car that had just rolled off the assembly line.
while I do get your point, I'd probably tend to consider it fully original despite the respray
let's try with an analogy: if you had to re-trim the seats would you use the exact same leather that was used by the factory, or would you use a higher quality more supple leather?
in the case of a re-trim I would have no dubts in saying that to me the orignal lower quality option would definitely be preferable
however in the case of repaint I'm really not sure of what I'd opt for if faced with such a decision
Good analogy, but let's take it one step further because I think we'll reach the same conclusion.
Accurate (read: not very good) re-trim = car isn't 'original' and can't be described/valued as such, but may score some sentimental/purist points because it looks more like the original job.
Improved (read: superior craftsmanship evident) re-trim = car isn't 'original' and can't be described/valued as such, but may score points on being in a 'better' condition than others by any other objective measure of quality.
Back to re-sprays: I think ultimately a lot of the worry with non-original cars is that you question what they're hiding. However, I would go so far as to suggest that if a fully documented portfolio is presented which allays any fears of foul play, I can imagine a noticeably superior job actually enhancing a car's financial value, and unless they were extremely forthcoming I would be more suspicious of an owner opting to deliberately temper/bodge a job in order to look original:
a) for fear that the intention was to disguise something unpleasant, or
b) using 'originality' as an excuse to get cheap work done and cut corners (which could cast niggling doubts over the maintenance history)
I will say this though - I'm not an Enzo buyer, so I'm talking pure conjecture and I'm aware of it.