Critique

In the end, our product was successful in some ways and unsuccessful in others.

It was successful in that the projection, despite being a bit smaller than we could have liked due to the projector problems we had, looked very nice and calming on the translucent fabrics hung from the ceiling of the installation.  We also received positive feedback on the tent being a "curiosity" in the library and being in a very open space, which prompted those walking by to wonder what it was and try it out.

It was unsuccessful in other ways.  Our focus was on the interior, so we didn't give much thought to the exterior, and it remained relatively plain and boring in the final installation.  The pink noise volume ratio to the popping noises was off and caused people to think it was either a fan or a boiler rather than a purposeful choice of a relaxing soundscape.  The projector being so close to people's heads while inside also caused interference with the projector's fan noise and bright light, which was unpleasant to some people.  

If we were to deploy this long-term and at scale, we would create a series of these tents with more interesting exteriors (perhaps shimmering fabric to make them more inviting, and a draw-string curtain opening) and more interaction with the projections. They could be placed in a row rounded against the wall where they were previously so that more than one person could experience them at a time and they would create a further curiosity. The solitary experience of "getting away" is central to our theme, so we wouldn't have made any tent bigger to include more people.  We also would place the projector closer to the ground and away from people's heads to reduce uncomfortableness with that and play around with the soothing sounds.