Belgium 1875 5 Franc Stamp: Genuine Or Forgery?

Six years ago I bought a good quality Belgium collection, wholesale, from a local dealer. I am just going through it now as my stamp time is abundant these days. Scott's says that there are dangerous forgeries of the 1875 5 Franc stamp. I have compared this stamp to the notes in The Serrane Guide, and it seems to be a genuine copy.

Can anyone confirm for me whether this is indeed genuine or one of the dangerous forgeries? Thanks for the help!

Look forward to opinions. Lovely stamp.
Roller Cancel (Pizza Wheel)
Could not see any reference to "FS" in expertisers.

Thanks, Rod, I am excited to see some opinions too!

I looked up expertizers by country of expertise, and came up with a Dr F. Schreuders at The Hague in 1897, but it does not say whether he used "FS" as his mark. I dunno!

RM
He appears to be listed only for the Netherlands Indies?
Not Belgium.

My gut feeling it is genuine. Centering isn't perfect (fakes tend to be practically perfect in every way), the cancel is contemporary, doesn't look like it's been tidied up at all.

Oh yes, it might not be a Schreuders expertising mark, as many continental dealers and owners also marked their good stamps.

How can you ask for an opinion on this stamp with such a poor pic?
Don't you see how other people in this forum post great pics?
There are at least 20 points of authenticity that need to be confirmed
in this 5F stamp.Most of these points are very small.

perf12 brings up a very important problem here. I have been trying to post a larger image of the stamp, but after spending a frustrating hour at it last night, I finally gave up. When I use the Free Image Optimizer, most of the time the buttons will not work for me. Is this a security issue? Do I need to disable my security program to make the optimizer work? What am I doing wrong? I am still new here and am not a savvy tech person, so I would appreciate help in posting a bigger image.

The original pic has to be clear and in focus.Set your camera on close up pics.At least 4 meg image.Then you can reduce the pixel size...

Thanks perf12. I have been using my Hewlett-Packard scanner for stamp images, but will try using my camera instead.

Edited: The camera photo attempt was a bust, much less clear. My Canon S3 digital camera does not do close-ups well.

This was previously answered:
http://goscf.com/t/35189

Thanks, Germania! That link to an earlier thread was VERY helpful!

After carefully studying my copy, I now believe that it is a Sperati forgery. It is virtually identical to Danko's copy (his is off center and has the roller cancellation too). The other small points of identification match up well too. Mine also has a tiny white dot between the "A" and the "N" in the same place as Danko's copy. NL1947 attributed the dot to an "impression coincidence". But, two very similar stamps with the same random dot does not sound like a coincidence to me. Apparently Sperati may have made more than one attempt at forging this stamp. Although a lot of the design points of my stamp match the genuine ones, the dot disturbs me. Yeah, Scott's was right about "dangerous" forgeries of this stamp.
I think my best option it to have it expertized when APS is open to accepting stamps for expertizing again.

I still need to learn how to post larger, clearer images!

Here are mine, the unused has a cert:

restoman

We never came to a conclusion on my example, and I never send it for a cert, maybe I will some day. Definitely curies to see the results of yours. If you ever send it, please share with us the results.

"We never came to a conclusion"-----Yea that's correct ,because the scan is not large enough to positive I.D. the stamp. This stamp has well made forgeries and a large scan would change that .