Kaz,

I found the ‘respraying is damage history’ in Japan really interesting. When I was looking for a car in Japan, the dealers hid a lot of issues which makes me think that 1. The domestic market customers are treated better, or 2. There’s not a lot of difference between Japan and here. I have never been to Japan.

I believe it is inevitable that paint is as much a consumable as many of the parts we replace or recondition. Kaz, you are fastidious with maintenance.
The illusion that something is original is mostly a fallacy. Especially when one considers that a sizeable percentage of cars are refinished between factory and dealer. You could be saving the paint you believe to be original, but which amy have been done later.
I was at one of the UK’s top restoration shops this week. They have the most beautiful cars; muiras, 275GTB’s, 250 california’s etc etc. the original cars were never as good as these restored examples. But honestly, so what, they look incredible. They are command horrific sums.
With one exception, every NSX I have owned has been painted somewhere. There’s a car currently for sale online which boasts all original paint and that car had the old 97+ corrosion issue. Hence, all original apart from the front, that back and one side��
I believe that something painted well is much better than the alternative which is bubbling arches, massive paint deviations between plastic and metal (I know the old argument), burn throughs and scratch damage.
I know that ‘patina’ tells a story and I concede each to his/her own.
Personally, I embrace maintenance whether mechanical or aesthetic.
Cheers.