>>96530517
>he face in front of the legs has kind of an odd blur
You are somewhat correct. I tried to match the old wiki page, and though that face on the original pics are not good quality as well, I did nothing to improve its detail.
>>96532080
It's in a small part due to scanning, imo.
I'll tell my process: I used picrel for starters, cleared the junk around it, and fully desaturated it. Then I up-scaled it, as well as the same (smaller) pic that's on the wiki, and tried to superimpose them; trying to match them in terms of position and in the tones of B&W.
In the end, I uploaded the end result on the wiki, replacing the older version.