What's the difference between an original and a reproduction in a medium that's designed to be endlessly reproducible? Most art dealers would say that a photograph printed after the death of the photographer is a reproduction, but if the photographer didn't do his own printing, is there really a difference? A first, second, and in many cases a third generation copy negative will be almost indistinguishable from the camera original. The original of this image would have been a black & white photograph that had been hand tinted to add color. Judging by the condition and dried tape on the back of this print, it's very old, but it's printed on color paper. Some time in the past, probably at least forty or fifty years ago, someone wanted a copy of this image, so they went to a photo lab, had a color copy neg and print made. Written on the back, Mrs. M Arciaga, 573-18th, San Pedro, Cal."