There's a company in the UK that's very successful at flogging over exposed portraits, whilst the images themselves are no great shakes they 'sell' the service by framing them in top quality frames, upon which are stuck these little metal 'logos' that they use, when I first found out how much they charge I was gobsmacked and couldn't believe anybody would be stupid enough to pay that much for what was just a portrait on a white background that had the levels boosted in PS afterwards, now having spoken to a few people that have paid for the service they all said the same thing, it was the presentation that sold it to them.
They also all said that in hindsight they know they've been ripped off, one thing I will say is that the frames are the best bit and those little metal logo's look cool.

Don't know if that helps.

Having re read your question I would say it's subjective, why not try both and see which one sells most, personally speaking I wouldn't want the photo title on it, a small and subtle signature that doesn't distract from the photo I could live with.

Doing a signature would be easy, just buy a graphics tablet and apply it in PS.

why not get an embossing stamp?
if you're really going into it big time, that would look really classy.
i knew a photographer when i was still studying in NYI and he had his gallery prints embossed with his stamp.
it looks like a diploma (certificate), and naturally, very professional and unique.
not sure how much it cost him to get that stamp.
my father, who used to be in a different kind of business, but big time pro all the same, had one too.
i guess it stands out from the rest. and it 's not easy to erase, almost impossible, unlike ink which would fade with time.