The danger is that youll never believe your old interpretations
after viewing this show. In my main show I compare 32 in-lines
before and after noise removal. (this show is abbrevated.) You will
see a complete change in structure, as well as an exquisite display
of stratigraphy never seen before. The data comes from some old
stuff I must have forgotten to destroy. It was used to prove my
inversion / integration logic. Back then I saw the noise but had
not developed my present tools, and had to depend on a very deep
mute to avoid the worst. (Abbreviated for the internet.) The reason
for the extended show was that I wanted to prove to myself that my
technique was solid over a large set of data. However the reason
Ive highlighted it here is because of the rather monumental change
it makes in interpretation. If seeing is believing, the more you
see is good, but I have to settle for what people will wait for, so
I cut out a lot of fairly repetitive before and after pairs. If you
would like to see the original, let me know. At the bottom of each
results screen you will find this red arrow. By clicking on it you
will see the regular stack without noise removal. The noise liftoff
is the only difference in the two runs. Once there, you will see
the blue arrow that will return you to the main flow. I do not
believe this type of noise is at all unusual. You will see a
drastic change in structure. Removing the noise brings out a much
stronger overall dip, as well as greatly enhanced resolution. This
evedence says the noise is surface oriented, which makes a lot of
sense. The change is so great I expect many to question the
believability of the process. However, keep in mind that the only
difference between the two runs is noise liftoff and it is not
logical of the disbeliever to think I could have manufactured what
has been uncovered.
Slide 2
Note the dip And please do a 2 finger toggling from here on
out.
Slide 3
The noise dip is much flatter, (because of near surfac
orientation). It is also lower in frequency (suggesting shear wave
energy). Other than that, it stacks quite well, and people have
been mapping it for years.
Slide 4
Let the arrows guide finger toggling. They keep you on the same
line.
Slide 5
Slide 6
Just proving there are two distinctly different sets of energy
that compete with each other should open the eyes of people trying
to do too much with the data..
Slide 7
Slide 8
Even though I know it is true I myself find it hard to
believe.
Slide 9
Slide 10
I see strong evidnce of faulting, but the breaks have been
badly mulled by the use of migration before stack.
Slide 11
Slide 12
Note the difference in dominant frequency between the two sets
Weve now moved about one hundred inlines.
Slide 13
Slide 14
Were now 300 inlines in, and still we see the same
quality.
Slide 15
Slide 16
Click on circle to repeat series. Or here to return to
symposium router.