Cross Stitch: Is the Laying Tool Worth It?

That's what I'm trying to decide right now.  I've been working on the Evil Tiger Cross Stitch of Doom.  It's one of those projects that I pull out whenever I get into cross stitch, and I work on it for a few weeks until I get so frustrated that I shove it back in the bag until the next cross stitch phase.  (The chart isn't well designed, in my opinion.)

I got myself a stand for help with the big projects.  Now, I'm short overall (and thus have short arms), and I'm extremely short-waisted proportion-wise on top of that, and I stitch sitting back on the couch. Each of these makes a frame a bit of a difficult decision, so finding a stand that suits me with all of them is a tricky proposal.  Add to it that I don't have a local needlework shop, means I basically have to buy to try, and most needlework frames aren't cheap.
That said, I think I got about 80% positive on my first try, and I don't expect that I could get much better.

So, I'm working on the Evil Tiger Cross Stitch of Doom with a stand.  This piece is 3 strands on 14-count Aida cloth, so the stitching is pretty dense.  Three strands mean it isn't really suitable for railroading.  To be honest, I'm somewhat dubious about railroading in general, although I do use it on pieces when I'm doing 2 strands and working in-hand.  It seems to affect the amount of twist in the individual plies, though, and that's not easy to correct.

So, I've been using a laying tool (OK, a hair stick) with the Evil Tiger Cross Stitch of Doom, and I will absolutely admit that it makes the individual stitches look better.  It also makes the work progress at a speed usually only seen in tectonic plate movements.  If I'm getting even a hundred stitches an hour I'd be shocked, and when you're doing a piece with more than 30,000 stitches...  That isn't pretty math.

I got kind of fed up this evening, put the laying tool down and started doing the work two-handed since I am working in a stand.  Whoo!  Much faster!  We're at least up to glacial speed here.  Of course, the individual stitches don't always look as nice.  But it occurs to me, there's this thing called "gallery distance".  Gallery distance is the distance from which an object is meant to be viewed, and in fine arts should at least theoretically be kept in mind when working details.  Details that are too coarse for their gallery distance appear rough, and details that are too fine can't be seen.

This thing I'm working on is a 10" by 28" picture.  It is intended to go on a wall.    Its "gallery distance" is between 2 and 15 feet.  Individual stitches are most assuredly in the "too fine to be seen" category; hell, I'm still thinking I should get a magnifier to be making them.  Now, there will be a difference in how light reflects off stitches depending on whether they are laid or not, and that may cause a difference at the gallery distance.  But if I'm observant and careful to untwist my floss when the stitches start to twist, I'm thinking that's not enough difference to be worth my sanity.

I would feel differently if I were entering competitions, but I'm not.  I do this for fun, and I can't have fun while being the level of anal required to win a dedicated cross stitch competition.  (Besides, competitions require that there be no pet hair, and that ain't happening in this house.  I do my best, but cat hairs are sneaky.)

In any event, I've got a trolley needle and a Best Laying Tool coming to me, so when they arrive I'll give them a try and see what I like.  The trolley needle in particular may get a "best of both worlds" going where I can do two-handed stitching without as much slow-down.  If not, gallery distance.  And the fact that I do this for fun, not for other people.