It is a pity that it is taking so long for theaters to deploy 3D projectors, because now all the TV makers are pushing the sale of home 3D TV sets very hard. This is helping to close a window of opportunity for second-tier entertainers to perform live before a non-local audience without the threat of Napsterism.
Let me explain.
A first-tier performer can fill a large concert hall, theater or stadium, because enough people exist within traveling distance. A second-tier entertainer cannot.
But the near-universal rollout of broadband Internet access in wealthy countries would seem to provide an opportunity for second-tier performers who cannot gather such a group locally, but CAN do so when mediated by telecommunications. That's because they can now gang together a network of small theaters to which a live video signal is fed simultaneously, and so amalgamate a huge audience which lets them put on a high-cost show. The ability to audit and even search patrons in a theater setting greatly reduces the threat of Napsterism, which would be present if the video was streamed directly to homes.
An added barrier would exist if theaters had 3D gear to provide a 3D show and homes did not, because even if a 3D recording were made by a clandestine techie in a theater (BTW, now a felony in the US), it could not be viewed in full 3D glory absent 3D TV sets in homes. Sure, some homes have PCs with 3D screens and some have PCs attached to big screens, but lacking both at once would raise a formidable barrier to making the pirate recording truly available to homes.
But as I started saying, it is no longer clear that theaters will fully rollout 3D projectors before 3D TV sets saturate US homes.
Of course, for now it still remains the case that not all music recordings people enjoy are pirated, and the problem is even less severe with video recordings. So it is not implausible that someone like Alizée could do a performance using a network of theaters, some 2D, some 3D, and gather a big enough group globally to put on a first-class show. In any case, it is clear such a "narrowcasting" scheme is far more resistant to Napsterism than video streams sent to individual homes. And a theatrical setting would also allow for "audience participation" in the show, both within the inidvidual theaters, and with a feed back to the performer, globally as well.
By the way, while you could not high-five Alizée in a televised 3D show, it provides an opportunity to do what an unmediated in-person experience cannot for the vast majority of a large audience. That's because the 3D camera can always have a "first-row seat" in which there is substantial stereopsis, which everyone can enjoy. Once you are many Alizée's in distance away from Alizée, she will appear "flat," even in person. This is also a good argument for using giant 3D screens at large-scale in-person performances, too.
There are a number of phenomenon that help your brain determine the size and shape of something. To a degree, you could make Alizée appear more like the size of Tinkerbell if the two lenses capturing her stereoscopic image had a lateral displacement much larger than that of the eyes of a typical human.
<center><img src="http://www.adorama.com/ALC/Files.ashx?link_id=70290abf-8935-14b4-7021-78ef87cbf043"></center>