Hi Sandra, this is my try.
To be honest, I'm not sure whether it's any better (or perhaps worse!) than the original. I started out by just trying to balance out the darker and lighter sections. The more 'balanced' version showed much more 'colour distortions' than in the original. There was pink/purple everywhere! I tried to fixed that (rough and ready) and removed most of the spots. But (zoomed-in) there were still large 'blocks of different colours/tints that indicatecd a low image quality (low resolution in combination with a high jpg compression level.). I smoothed over the 'blocks' as best I could and probably lost some detail in the process.
Just one comment (intended purely in a positive, helpful way): I fully realise that members get photos from all sorts of sources (past and present) for which they request restores. They often don't have access to the original photos.
It's just (always) worth mentioning that this photo looks to me like a photo of a photo (rather than a good quality scan) and that the file size is rather small (12.5% of the maximum allowed). This is often an indication that either the photo resolution (which in this photo is OK) and/or the saved 'jpg' quality level are lower than they might be. Many members 'inherit' or discover old digital photos and have no influence on the digital quality.
If you do, by chance, have access to the original photo (and if it's important to you) you might want to consider scanning it with a resolution of at least 300 (and preferably 600) dpi
and making sure that your scanner save the file as a 'best/high quality' jpg file. If you were able to do this, you'd get much more sharpness and detail in the photo (original and restored).
If you're happy with the restores that members submit, just forget all the above
Mike
