Is publishing in open access journal a good impression ? I mean publishing in such journals (where one has to pay money), will it be valuable compared to other journals ?
It depends entirely on the journal. There are good and bad open access journals, just as there are good and bad closed access journals.
For example, in biology Nature Communications, Cell Reports, eLife, PLoS Biology and Genome Biology are all open access journals with excellent reputations.
PLoS One, BMC genomics, PeerJ, Scientific Reports are open access journals that have a reputation (earned or not) of publishing work which is sound, but maybe less exciting.
And then there are various lower quality open access journals that people might be suspicious of.
This is no different from closed access journals.
For academic reputation purposes, publishing in a reputable open access journal is fine. I'm assuming that the journal goes through a proper review and editorial process and that papers might be rejected for quality or innovation reasons. Otherwise, it may be a predatory journal that just wants your money and will publish anything.
But it is the reputation of the journal and its adherence to norms that makes this valid, not whether the authors (or their grants) or subscribers pay for the costs, etc. of publishing.
In some ways, it is a (minor) reputation enhancement since you are doing something for the public beyond what is required by absorbing the costs.
But do a bit of investigation of any journal (open access or not).