Earth-Science Reviews 47 Ž1999.

189–218
www.elsevier.comrlocaterearscirev

Definition of subsurface stratigraphy, structure and rock

properties from 3-D seismic data
)
Bruce S. Hart
New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Socorro, NM 87801, USA
Received 2 February 1998; accepted 12 April 1999

Abstract

This paper summarizes how three-dimensional Ž3-D. seismic technology is being used, primarily in the petroleum
industry, to define subsurface structure, stratigraphy and rock properties. A 3-D seismic data volume: Ža. provides a more
accurate image of the subsurface than can be obtained with 2-D seismic methods; Žb. is continuous, and so has a much
greater spatial sampling than is obtained with 2-D seismic or other subsurface data Že.g., wells.; and Žc. can be viewed and
interpreted interactively from a variety of perspectives, thus enhancing the interpreter’s ability to generate an accurate
description of subsurface features of interest. Seismic interpretation was once the almost exclusive realm of geophysicists,
however, most 3-D seismic interpretation today is conducted by multidisciplinary teams that integrate geophysical,
geological, petrophysical and engineering data and concepts into the 3-D seismic interpretation. These factors, plus proper
survey design, help to increase the chances of success of a 3-D seismic interpretation project. Although there are cases where
the technology is not appropriate or cannot be applied Žfor economic reasons or otherwise., the general success of 3-D
seismic has led it to become a mainstay of the petroleum industry. The approach and technology, first developed in that
industry, have potential applications in other applied and fundamental earth science disciplines, including mining,
environmental geology, structural geology and stratigraphy. q 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: seismic; petroleum; structure; stratigraphy; rock properties

1. Introduction cently has been utilized almost entirely within that

field. However, potential applications of 3-D seismic
Few technologies have affected a geoscience sub-
data in other geoscience disciplines are many, includ-
discipline to the extent that three-dimensional Ž3-D.
ing studies in structural geology, stratigraphy, geo-
seismic has affected petroleum geoscience Žgeology
physics and petrophysics. The mining industry has
and geophysics.. Like the field of seismic stratigra-
begun to investigate the potential of 3-D seismic to
phy before it Žwhich more or less directly spawned
identify and map ore bodies, and to plan mine devel-
sequence stratigraphy., 3-D seismic technology was
opment ŽEaton et al., 1997.. Furthermore, it may be
developed in the petroleum industry and until re-
possible to transfer the technology cost-effectively to
the environmental sector ŽSiahkoohi and West, 1998..
)
Fax: q1-505-835-6333; E-mail: hart@nmt.edu The cost and technical requirements of collecting

0012-8252r99 r$ - see front matter q 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 1 2 - 8 2 5 2 Ž 9 9 . 0 0 0 2 9 - X
190 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
and interpreting 3-D seismic data have prevented,
until recently, most academic researchers from ob-
taining and utilizing them, although some 3-D seis-
mic data have been collected to study deep crustal
structure Že.g., Kanasewich et al., 1987, 1995. and
others have been collected in conjunction with the
ocean drilling program ŽShipley et al., 1994..
Changes within the petroleum industry that have
been brought about by the use of 3-D seismic also
have had a significant, albeit indirect, impact in other
areas. One example is the use of computer worksta-
tions in data visualization. Some large 3-D seismic
surveys contain gigabytes of data. Seismic inter-
preters have been pushing software and hardware
developers to be able to visualize and interpret these
enormous data sets interactively, and the hardware,
software and concepts developed this way will have
an impact on other earth science fields. The 3-D
seismic revolution has helped to promote the devel-
opment of multidisciplinary teams. Integration of
seismic and geological data and concepts in worksta-
tion environments has been undertaken for at least a
decade Žcf., Cross and Lessenger, 1988.. However,
the continuous coverage provided by 3-D seismic
data has revealed details of reservoir complexities
that cannot be characterized using 2-D seismic and
well control. Multidisciplinary teams in many com-
panies integrate different data types and use the 3-D
seismic workstation Žand derived products such as
maps and volume interpretations. as focal points for
their exploration and development efforts. In some
regions and organizations, wells are not drilled with-
out previously collecting and interpreting 3-D seis-
mic data.
Why have 3-D seismic and associated technolo-
gies had such a profound impact on the petroleum
industry? What are the benefits of 3-D seismic? How
does one acquire and interpret such data? This sum-
mary will address these questions, and present an-
swers in terms that will be accessible to the geo-
science community at large. The main purposes of
this paper are: Ža. to illustrate how 3-D data are
collected and interpreted in the petroleum industry,
and Žb. to suggest how other subdisciplines of geo-
science might exploit the technology.
There are other developing fields of seismic tech-
nology, such as amplitude variation with offset, ver-
tical seismic profiling, seismic inversion and cross-
well seismic technology that are often used in con-
junction with 3-D data. It is beyond the scope of this
paper to discuss these topics. Furthermore, a com-
plete review of the principles of seismic surveying
and interpretation will not be presented here. Instead,
only those aspects that are germane to 3-D seismic
collection, processing or interpretation will be pre-
sented here. Numerous other sources present infor-
mation about the seismic method Že.g., Sheriff and
Geldart, 1995.. Brown Ž1996a. dealt exclusively with
3-D seismic analyses, and Weimer and Davis Ž1996.
presented many illustrative case studies of the use of
3-D seismic data, principally for petroleum explo-
ration and development.
2. 3-D seismic acquisition and processing
Like 2-D seismic studies, 3-D seismic data are
acquired by generating an acoustic pulse at or near
the surface Žland surface or sea surface., and record-
ing the energy that is reflected from subsurface
changes in physical properties Žspecifically, velocity
and density.. Contacts between stratigraphic units
having detectable changes in physical properties
Žoften associated with the tops of formations, mem-
bers, etc.. will cause reflections and be picked as
seismic horizons 1 during the interpretation phase in
order to discern structural and stratigraphic details of
interest.
On land, sources are typically vibroseis trucks or
dynamite, and the receivers are geophones that detect
ground motions. At sea, 3-D seismic surveys are
collected using airgun arrays, with pressure sensitive
hydrophones detecting the reflected energy. In al-
most all cases, it is compressional wave Ž‘‘p wave’’.
energy that is recorded, although multicomponent
3-D surveys that include recording of shear wave
reflections are becoming more common Že.g., Arestad
et al., 1996..
With 2-D seismic data collection, sources and
receivers are laid out along a line, and the reflected
energy is assumed to come from a point mid-way
between source and receiver Žthe common midpoint.
1
Italicized terms are defined in Appendix A.
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218 191

along a vertical 2-D plane. In the case of horizontally do not lie mid-way between sources and receivers.
layered strata, this assumption is valid. However, in Seismic migration is a processing technique that
areas where there is appreciable subsurface structure, attempts to reposition this reflected energy to its true
reflected energy can be recorded from interfaces that subsurface location. The need for migration of 2-D

Fig. 1. Seismic modeling results showing an example of sideswipe and Fresnel zone effects associated with a reef. The upper image shows
the model in map view, illustrating the locations of seismic transects shown below. The reef is visible in a seismic transect that is over 300
m to the side. Although the sections have not been migrated, 2-D migration will not be able to remove the sideswipe image of the reef from
the transects ŽJackson and Hilterman, 1979; cited by Crawley Stewart, 1995.. Reproduced with permission from Hilterman.
192 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218

seismic data has been recognized from the early

stages of seismic exploration ŽSheriff and Geldart,
1995..
Where subsurface structural or stratigraphic enti-
ties have a distinct three dimensionality Ži.e., many
or most areas of geologic interest., reflections may
be recorded from interfaces that are outside of the
plane containing the source and receivers ŽFig. 1..
These reflections, sometimes called sideswipe, can-
not be removed from seismic profiles using 2-D
migration. It may be impossible to distinguish this
sideswipe from reflections that are truly in the plane
of the seismic profile, and maps or interpretations
that are drawn from such seismic sections will be
erroneous. Applied and theoretical examples of this
problem have been presented by French Ž1974.,
Crawley Stewart Ž1995. and Brown Ž1996a. among
others.
The acquisition of 3-D seismic data exploits the
spherical expansion of the acoustic pulse in the
subsurface away from the source. On land, one
common acquisition pattern spreads receiver groups
out in lines that are oriented at 908 to the shot lines
ŽFig. 2.. Reflections from each shot are recorded by
many geophones, producing a row of common mid-
points that is perpendicular to the orientation of the
source lines, and parallel to the orientation of the
receiver lines. By moving the shot location, a subsur-
face grid of common midpoints is generated. Note
that the acquisition geometry shown in Fig. 2 is a
gross simplification of real survey design. Although
there are many different designs that can be used,
each survey typically consists of many parallel source
Fig. 2. Sample source and receiver layout for a land-based 3-D
lines and many parallel receiver lines that are ori-
seismic acquisition program. In this simple case, each shot is
ented perpendicular to the source lines. Each shot is recorded by a line of receivers. By moving the source location, a
recorded by a patch of geophones. In this way, rectangular grid of common midpoints is generated. In practice,
individual midpoints are imaged by different combi- many source and receiver lines would exist, increasing the number
nations of sources and receivers, thus, building up of source — receiver combinations that image a particular mid-
point to build up the fold Žand data quality. of the survey. Other,
the fold Žor multiplicity . of the survey. Higher fold
more complex, survey layouts are typically used in practice.
data, all else being equal, will result in a higher
signal-to-noise ratio and therefore more interpretable
seismic data. Experience has shown that the fold of a
3-D survey needs only to be about one half the fold Increasingly though, innovative techniques such as
of a 2-D survey to obtain the same interpretability using two vessels simultaneously, or implanting geo-
ŽB. Hardage, personal communication, 1994.. phones on the sea floor, are being developed and
At sea, 3-D seismic data are generally acquired by exploited.
ships towing airgun arrays and hydrophone streamers The spacing between the midpoints in the receiver
that sailed back and forth across the survey area. direction is one half the distance between the re-
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218 193

ceivers, while the spacing in the source direction is
one half the distance between the source locations.
For example, assuming that source and receiver loca-
tions are both at 60 m intervals, midpoints will be
generated every 30 m = 30 m. In this case, each
midpoint represents an area or bin of 30 m = 30 m.
The bin size might be rectangular, rather than square,
if the distances between source and receiver loca-
tions are not identical.
By acquiring continuous coverage of seismic data
in three dimensions, the data can be migrated in
three dimensions. In this way, reflection energy is
accurately repositioned to its true subsurface loca-
tion, and transects through a 3-D seismic volume
will only show those features that are truly in the
plane of the section Že.g., Brown, 1996a.. As such,
all else being equal, a vertical transect through a 3-D
seismic volume is a more accurate, better image than
an equivalent seismic transect derived using 2-D
acquisition and processing.
of as a series of cubes, or Õoxels Ža term analogous
to the 2-D pixels of remote sensing., each of which
stores a particular amplitude value ŽFig. 3.. Using
modern computer graphics capabilities, it is possible
to visualize and interpret the seismic data in a variety
of ways Žsee below..
When seismic data were primarily viewed as pa-
per sections, the standard display format was to use
black and white variable area wiggle displays. This
display presents seismic traces as continuous curves
that define a time series of positive Žpeaks. and
negative Žtroughs. amplitudes, and the peaks are
filled in with a solid black colour.
A drawback of the variable area wiggle display is
that the eye tends to focus on the peaks, and the

3. Viewing 3-D seismic data

Virtually, all interpretation of 3-D seismic data is

conducted on workstations or powerful personal
computers ŽHart, 1997.. By exploring and visualiz-
ing both the data and interpretations in progress, the
geoscientist can derive a much better understanding
of the three dimensionality of subsurface strati-
graphic and structural elements. This allows the in-
terpreter to generate a more accurate subsurface de-
scription Ždepicted in maps, etc.., than by working
with paper seismic displays andror well logs alone.
These visualization technologies further aid the geo-
scientist in conveying the results of his or her work
to others who have not been involved in the interpre-
tation process.
Each bin in a 3-D seismic volume Žhaving x, y
Fig. 3. Conceptual diagram showing a 3-D data volume. Each
dimensions that are defined primarily by data acqui- voxel in such a volume is characterized by x, y, z coordinates
sition operations. can be represented by a single and an amplitude value Žpositive and negative values.. The x and
seismic trace, conceptually centered in the middle of y dimensions of each voxel represent the bin size, and are a
the bin. Each trace in turn is divided into equal function of acquisition parameters, whereas the z dimension of a
increments in the z direction that define the sam- voxel represents the digital sampling interval. The range of ampli-
tudes depends upon how the data have been scaled. In a variable
pling interval. For petroleum exploration purposes, density display Žtop and side of the cube., the numerical amplitude
the sampling interval is typically 2 or 4 ms. The values are represented by colours that are selected by the inter-
result is that the 3-D seismic volume can be thought preter Žsee Fig. 4..
194 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218

Fig. 4. Colour displays of seismic data. Ža. Seismic data has traditionally been displayed as Õariable area wiggle displays Žleft. in which the
reflected energy is displayed as waveforms consisting of positive and negative amplitude values Žpeaks and troughs respectively.. Peaks are
filled in with black to enhance the interpretability of the seismic transect. Computer graphics displays allow the amplitudes Žcenter. to be
colour coded so that positive and negative amplitudes are shown, respectively, in blues and reds with the darkness of each colour being
proportional to the amplitude value. Whites correspond to zero amplitude. By removing the wiggle trace Žright. the seismic traces are shown
as Õariable density displays. Žb. Variable density display of a seismic transect. By displaying adjacent traces side by side, the display has the
appearance of data continuity throughout the entire transect. Compare with the variable area wiggle display of the same transect Žc.. The
colour display gives approximately equal weight to peaks and troughs Žblue and red, respectively., helping the interpreter to detect
stratigraphic and structural features. Variations in amplitude along a single reflector are also easier to detect. Although the blue–white–red
colour scale shown here is the most commonly used, interpreters will choose other scales to enhance certain aspects of the seismic data.
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
Fig. 4 Žcontinued..
information present in the troughs can be overlooked
ŽBrown, 1996a.. With the advent of interactive com-
puter displays, variable density displays have be-
come the norm. In this display, the peaks and troughs
are arbitrarily assigned distinct colours. One com-
monly employed colour scheme shows peaks as blue
Žwith stronger positive values being shown as darker
blue. passing through white Žnear zero amplitudes.
to red troughs Žmore negative values as darker red..
Other colour schemes can be generated by inter-
preters to highlight specific aspects of the seismic
data Že.g., bright spots, dim spots. on which they
wish to focus. The variable density display gives the
appearance of reflection continuity throughout the
entire 3-D volume ŽFig. 4..
The 3-D seismic data volume is stored in digital
format, on disk. The types of displays that can be
generated ŽFig. 5. depend on the software and hard-
ware capabilities of the interpreter, but generally can
be grouped into a few distinct categories that are
discussed next.
3.1. Vertical transects
Vertical transects through a 3-D seismic volume
ŽFig. 5a–d. look like 2-D seismic profiles, but differ
in that their location and orientation are decided by
195
the interpreter in an interactive manner, rather than
being constrained by the original seismic survey line
orientation as is the case for 2-D data. Since the data
are stored digitally, the interpreter can also zoom in
on small portions of the seismic data, or zoom out to
see the larger structural and stratigraphic framework.
Most software packages allow the user to quickly
display vertical transects: Ža. in the inline or line
direction, Žb. in the crossline or trace direction, and
Žc. arbitrary lines that represent transects through
the data in any direction decided upon by the inter-
preter. The arbitrary line may consist of a single
transect or a series of continuous transects that zigzag
their way through the data set Žsometimes called a
multipanel display.. Arbitrary lines are used when
the interpreter wishes to view the true geometry of
structural or stratigraphic features that are oriented
obliquely to the line or trace orientation Žsee below.,
or when wishing to tie borehole log information
from more than one well by integrating with the
seismic data. With vertical transects, the data can be
flattened on a selected horizon to more clearly view
true stratigraphic relationships in areas that have
been structurally deformed. This latter process is
akin to using a formation top or log pick as a datum
to construct a stratigraphic cross-section Žusing well
logs or outcrops. rather than generating a structural
cross-section.
196 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218

Fig. 5. Different types of 3-D seismic displays that can be viewed during an interactive interpretation session. Ža, b. Line and trace transects
that correspond to source and receiver line orientations, Žc. arbitrary transect, Žd. multipanel display, Že. time slice, Žf. horizon slice, Žg.
perspective display, Žh. cube display. See text for discussion.

3.2. Horizontal sections
These displays, known as time slices, represent a
slice through the data at a given two-way traveltime
ŽTWT, constant z coordinate; Fig. 5e and Fig. 6..
The display is somewhat analogous to a geologic
map. The difference is that instead of viewing how
stratigraphic units intersect the ground surface Žwhich
may or may not be planar., the interpreter sees how
the seismic manifestation of the stratigraphy inter-
sects an arbitrarily selected plane of constant TWT
through the seismic data. In both cases, however, the
thickness of the reflection from a given stratigraphic
unit on the display Žmap. is a function of the strati-
graphic dip Žfor a constant thickness, a less steeply
dipping bedrreflection will appear wider; Fig. 7a,b.
and ‘‘thickness’’ Žfrequency. of the reflection event
Žfor a given structural dip, higher frequency events
will appear thinner; Fig. 7c..
Although Brown Ž1996a. and others recom-
mended using time slices for horizon interpretation,
most interpreters tend to concentrate their use of
these displays on interpreting faults — especially
where stratigraphic dips are small Ži.e., relatively
undeformed basins.. The utility of time slices for
horizon interpretation is greatest when beds have a
pronounced dip. In this case, horizon mapping on
time slices can be a quick way of generating time
structure maps for those horizons. With the advent of
automatic horizon tracking and interfacing of seismic
interpretation with mapping packages Žsee below.,
time structure maps can, in most circumstances, be
generated just as readily by basing most interpreta-
tion on vertical sections.
Fault interpretation and correlation can be signifi-
cantly improved by interactively working with time
slices and vertical slices together. Time slice displays
show faults as curvilinear features that display lateral
offsets of reflections, amplitudes or abrupt changes
in seismic reflection character ŽFig. 6.. Typically,
faults can be traced laterally for considerable dis-
tances on time slices, thus, reducing the ambiguity
inherent in interpreting fault locations and orienta-
tions from 2-D seismic or well data Žsee below..
3.3. Horizonr fault and map displays
These displays show characteristics of horizons or
faults that have been interpreted in a seismic volume.
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218 197

Fig. 6. Time slice through 3-D seismic volume, offshore Gulf of Mexico. Note curvilinear trends of reflection character offset that
correspond to faults viewed in vertical sections. By interpreting the faults on both vertical transects and time slices, the potential for
miscorrelation is reduced, leading to a more accurate interpretation than could be generated using 2-D seismic data.

They allow the interpreter to view spatial relation-
ships in two dimensions. Time structure of an inter-
preted horizon, showing locations of faults, folds and
structural dips, is perhaps the most commonly viewed
display. If desired, the interpreter can interactively
adjust the colour scale bar to detect structural rela-
tionships Že.g., areas with subtle closure that could
act as hydrocarbon traps. that might otherwise be
overlooked.
In many areas, the seismic amplitudes associated
with particular stratigraphic horizons can be of sig-
nificance Že.g., Enachescu, 1993.. For example,
‘bright spots’ are associated with hydrocarbon accu-
mulations in some areas, and interpreters will exam-
ine map displays of the amplitude of seismic hori-
zons in order to look for stratigraphic or structural
features that might be hydrocarbon traps. Displays of
horizon amplitudes are sometimes called horizon
slices ŽFig. 5f.. Channel sandstones and other strati-
graphic features can also, under some circumstances,
be identified using seismic amplitudes Že.g., Hardage
et al., 1994; Brown, 1996a.. Structural contours can
be superimposed onto amplitude displays in order to
allow the interpreter to easily search for relationships
between these two data types ŽFig. 8..
Bouvier et al. Ž1989. present an example of the
use of fault slices to examine fault sealing capabili-
ties of Tertiary faults in the Niger Delta area. By
generating fault slices in both the hanging wall and
footwall, the juxtaposition of lithologies across the
fault can be assessed. In this way, it might be
possible to judge whether a fault is a barrier to fluid
flow Že.g., sand on shale contact. or not Že.g., sand
on sand. along the entire fault plane.
198 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218

times employed in a ‘quick look’ fashion to identify

Fig. 7. Schematic diagram illustrating the effects of: Ža. strati-
graphic dip, and Žb. reflection frequency on the thickness of a
reflection viewed on a time slice. Adapted from Brown Ž1996a..
Although strictly not related to one horizon, map
displays are also employed to view thickness, in time
Žisochrons. or depth Žisopach. units, between two
stratigraphic horizons. Other interÕal attributes, such
as the maximum amplitude between two horizons,
can also be viewed and interpreted in this fashion.
These, and other interval attribute analyses are some-
stratigraphic configurations or rock properties ele-
ments that warrant detailed investigation. Horizon
attributes Ždiscussed below. are also viewed in map
views.
3.4. PerspectiÕe displays
This type of display ŽFig. 5g. shows horizons,
faults and well data as 3-D perspective Žisometric.
views that can be rotated to help the interpreter
assess spatial relationships in 3-D. Additionally, they
can be employed to quality check interpretations —
for example, to ensure that horizon or fault picks are
physically plausible. With some interpretation pack-
ages, it may be possible to superimpose ‘attributes’
such as seismic amplitude, isochrons Žthickness, in
time units., etc. on top of the 3-D surface to more
easily evaluate, for example, possible relationships
between amplitudes and structure. Illumination an-
gles and opacity might also be adjusted to help
detect subtle structural trends.
3.5. Cube displays
This type of display ŽFig. 5h and Fig. 9. allows
the interpreter to view the seismic data as a volume.
By scrolling through the data cube Žfront to back, left
to right, and top to bottom., the interpreter can
quickly get an intuitive feel for the broad scale
stratigraphic and structural configuration of a study
area before beginning detailed interpretation. Inter-
pretations Žfault and horizon. can, however, be made
on the faces of the data cube. The data may be
‘clipped’ in various ways to visualize specific as-
pects of the data set that will assist in the interpreta-
tion.
Most cube displays show the faces of the data
volume, while data behind those faces remain out of

Fig. 8. Ža. Vertical transect through 3-D seismic volume from the San Juan Basin, New Mexico, showing classic ‘‘doublet’’ response
Žtroughs. associated with thick accumulations of aeolian Jurassic Entrada Formation. Strong peak above the Entrada is the Todilto
Formation Žgypsum and limestone.. Žb. Time structure contours of the Entrada horizon superimposed on horizon slice of the formation.
Contours were generated by picking the horizon on seed lines, autotracking the horizon throughout the survey area, quality checking the
result, then contouring the data. The contours suggest a thick build-up of the dune deposits along the lower margin of the survey area. The
amplitude of the Todilto reflection decreases over the crest of the buildup Žlower amplitudes shown in lighter greys., helping to corroborate
the interpretation and increase the attractiveness of this area as a drilling target Žsee Vincelette and Chittum, 1981, for a description of the
seismic character of Entrada reservoirs.. Although small, these deposits can form attractive drilling targets. It would not be possible to
pinpoint the optimal drilling location for these types of buildups, or other features such as pinnacle reefs, meandering channel sands, etc.,
with this degree of confidence using 2-D seismic or well control alone.
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218 199

sight. Voxel rendering technologies allow the inter-
preter to make specific ranges of amplitudes trans-
parent, leaving only particular ranges of amplitudes
visible. The objective is to facilitate the 3-D viewing
and interpretation of subsurface features, such as
bright spots associated with hydrocarbon accumula-
tions, that have specific amplitude characteristics.
This type of display can be especially useful, for
example, when planning a deviated wellbore so that
it penetrates multiple pay zones that manifest them-
200 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218 201

selves as bright spots at distinct stratigraphic levels.
Virtual reality technologies are being explored that
allow the interpreter to view the data in 3-D or even
to ‘‘enter’’ the seismic volume ŽDorn, 1998.. How-
ever, application of these technologies is not
widespread.
3.6. Combination displays
Some software applications allow several differ-
ent types of data and interpretations to be visualized
together Že.g., Fig. 10.. For example, it may be
desirable to examine well paths, interpreted horizons,
and some seismic data together. As is the case with
the other types of displays, the objective is to help
the interpreter to visualize the geology, engineering
and other types of data in 3-D. Another important
component is that these displays help the interpreter
to present hisrher results to others Že.g., co-workers,
management, investors. who have not been active in
the interpretation process.
4. Interpreting 3-D seismic data
In the petroleum industry, most 3-D seismic inter-
pretation is conducted by members of multidisci-
plinary teams that are composed of geologists,
geophysicists and engineers ŽHart, 1997.. This is
because experience has shown that the ambiguity
inherent in the seismic method Ždue to limitations on
vertical and lateral resolution and the non-uniqueness
of the seismic response. can be reduced by integrat-
ing geologic and petroleum engineering data and
concepts ŽFig. 11..
As with other subsurface studies, the principal
objectives of a 3-D seismic survey are definition of
subsurface stratigraphy, structure and rock physical
properties. Most such data sets are collected from
areas of existing production, so that some subsurface
control Že.g., wireline logs, paleontological data, en-
gineering data. exists already. Having this informa-
tion ‘up front’ allows the interpretation team mem-
bers to better exploit the massive amounts of data
available to them in the 3-D seismic volume. Typi-
cally, however, an interpretation is not viewed so
much as a ‘final product’ as a ‘work in progress’
that is to be updated and revised as new data become
available through drilling. The establishment of de-
velopment drilling plans Žfinding infill and step out
drilling sites. is a common application of 3-D seis-
mic, although most interpreters will also use the data
for exploration purposes Že.g., looking for other, as
yet unproductive, stratigraphic intervals.. There is
increasing use of 3-D seismic data, particularly by
large companies, as a purely exploration tool.
It should be noted that although the vertical reso-
lution of seismic data Žgenerally, only features 10 m
or more in thickness will be resolved. is not as great
as wireline logs or core Žmillimeter scale in core,
decimeter scale in logs., the continuous subsurface
coverage in a 3-D survey provides much better spa-
tial control for mapping. For example, in North
America, typical development drilling density might
be 16 wells per section Ž2.59 km2 ., yielding 16
‘control points’ Žwells with wireline logs. in that
area. A 3-D seismic survey over that same area
might have 33.5 m = 33.5 m bins, yielding 2304
control points in the same area. The result is that the
3-D seismic survey has 144 times more control
points for mapping than even the relatively tightly
spaced wells ŽRay, 1995.. As such, mapping of
stratigraphic and structural features using 3-D seis-
mic Žprovided that they can be detected seismically.
is much more accurate than mapping based on inter-
pretation between even densely spaced wells or 2-D
seismic data.
4.1. Stratigraphic interpretation
As with a 2-D seismic interpretation, the strati-
graphic interpretation of a 3-D seismic volume typi-

Fig. 9. Sample cube displays. Ža. Entire data set showing east–west and north–south vertical transects along the front and right side faces of
the cube, respectively, and a time slice on the top face. Žb. Entire time range is shown, but the front face has been cut to show an east–west
transect about 2r3 of the way into the volume, showing only a limited part of the survey area. Žc. Entire area of survey is shown, but the top
face has been cut down about 3r4 of the way into the volume. By interactively scrolling through a data cube such as this, the interpreter can
quickly assess changes in stratigraphic and structural style with location and depth.
 202
B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
Fig. 10. Combination display showing a 2-D seismic line Žleft, colour., a portion of a 3-D seismic cube Žback, grey tones., a voxel display of a 2nd 3-D volume Žgreens and
yellows, right., two interpreted horizons from the seismic data Žblue, pink., some well logs Žblue, coming down from top. and the locations of the 3-D seismic data sets Žyellow
and red grid at bottom., 2-D seismic lines Žblue, at bottom. and wells Žred dots at bottom.. By integrating different types of data and interpretations into single displays such as
this, multidisciplinary teams can make better drilling and reservoir management decisions. Figure courtesy of Landmark Graphics.
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218 203

Fig. 11. Bar graph showing responses of 133 seismic interpreters when asked about the need to integrate geologic and engineering data and
concepts into a 3-D seismic interpretation. Experience shows that it is only through integration of the technology with other data types that
the true potential of 3-D seismic technology is realized. From Hart Ž1997..

cally begins by tying wireline logs Žgeologic data. to
the seismic data using Õelocity surÕeys, Õertical
seismic profiles andror synthetic seismograms Že.g.,
Sheriff and Geldart, 1995.. From these initial seed
points, horizons are interpreted on a grid of vertical
transects. The grid allows the user to ‘box in’ the
picks, helping to ensure a consistent interpretation.
Picking a horizon on every line in a 3-D volume
can be a labour intensive task, and so most software
packages have an autotracking application that can
be employed to automate the process. The grid of
manual horizon picks forms a network of seed points,
from which the software will attempt to track a pick
of similar phase and amplitude throughout the seis-
mic volume. Under ideal conditions, such as a con-
tinuous reflection that has significantly higher ampli-
tude than surrounding events, it might be possible to
autotrack a horizon based on a single seed point.
Conversely, in areas of high noise or geologic com-
plexity it may not be possible to autotrack a horizon
at all. In any case, the results of the autotracking
need to be checked and manually edited where nec-
essary. The finished horizon pick should be both
geologically and geophysically defensible. Once time
structure maps have been derived, the horizons are
converted to true depths Že.g., meters. using avail-
able velocity data.
Once a stratigraphic framework has been estab-
lished, such as by defining and mapping flooding
surfaces, unconformities or other significant and de-
finable horizons, detailed stratigraphic analyses
Žseismic facies analysis, reflection character analysis.
are conducted on those intervals that are judged to be
of particular stratigraphic importance. Clinoforms,
channels, parasequences, reef complexes or other
stratigraphic entities are studied using conventional
seismic stratigraphic criteria Že.g., Mitchum et al.,
1977; Sarg, 1987. and by integrating all available
log, core and biostratigraphic data Že.g., Hart et al.,
1997.. Where line or trace orientations are oblique to
stratigraphic trends, arbitrary lines through a seismic
volume will be selected to examine the true longitu-
dinal and cross-sectional geometries of clinoforms,
channels and other features.
With most software packages, it is possible to
superimpose wireline logs directly over the seismic
data in vertical transects in order to help merge
geologic Žlogs. and geophysical Žseismic. data and
concepts ŽFig. 12.. To do so, some time-depth con-
version information is required. Depending on the
204 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218

Fig. 12. Example of a seismic view with well log overlay. Log curve shows g-ray Žincreasing to the right. with true well position indicated
by vertical white lines. Note good correspondence between lithology contrasts as indicated by logs Žlow g-ray, clean carbonates; higher
g-ray, dolomitic sandstones and siltstones. and the location of prominent reflections. This type of display is used to help verify picks, both
log and seismic. Seismic transect shows basinward progradation Žto left. of mixed siliciclasticrcarbonate Permian shelfrslope in Delaware
Basin, SE New Mexico.

types of logs employed, these displays can help to
guide correlations from well to well, identify facies
associations or stratal surfaces, identify fluid con-
tacts, etc.
Time and horizon slices can help the interpreter to
identify and map features such as fluvial channels,
sinkholes, Že.g., Hardage et al., 1994; Brown, 1996a.,
deltaic lobes ŽHart et al., 1997. and even meteorite
impact structures ŽIsaac and Stewart, 1993.. In the
petroleum industry, knowledge of the distribution of
these depositional features can help to identify or
predict sedimentary facies distributions, and thus the
location of reservoir quality rock or barriers or baf-
fles to subsurface fluid flow that might compartmen-

Fig. 13. Structure map Žlower left. of a horizon suggests the presence of a small NW–SE trending graben Ždarker greys are structurally
X
lower areas.. A seismic transect in the inline direction ŽA–A . does not clearly show the subtle fault on the southwest. This might be the
X
orientation of a 2-D seismic line. By viewing an arbitrary line that is perpendicular to the fault orientation ŽB–B ., the fault geometry
becomes clearer. Although the fault is readily apparent, it may not be clear from this view how the horizons correlate from one fault block
X Y
to another. As such, a multipanel display was chosen that goes around the fault pinchout to the north ŽC–C –C .. This latter display clearly
X
shows reflection continuity from one block to the other, thus, confirming the interpretation shown in B–B . Example from New York State
Žsee Hart et al., 1996..
B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218 205
206 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218

Fig. 14. Two different horizon attribute maps for the same seismic horizon. Ža. Dip map, showing variability in dip amount for the surface
Ždarker s greater dip.. Žb. Azimuth map, showing which way the horizon is dipping. Light source is from the upper right ŽNE., so that
surfaces dipping to the SW appear dark. These maps show linear trends that indicate the presence of subtle faults which were not evident
when interpreting vertical transects through this data volume.
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218 207

talize reservoir. Typically, vertical sections, time
structure maps, and horizon displays will be evalu-
ated simultaneously to assess a given prospect.
4.2. Structural interpretation
Structural and stratigraphic interpretations neces-
sarily feed off one another. For example, it is not
possible to calculate throw on a fault without being
able to identify common horizons on either side of
the structure. Conversely, to correlate a horizon from
one side of a fault to the other, the interpreter needs
to understand the fault geometry Žnormal, reverse,
etc... As with stratigraphic interpretation, vertical
transects, time slices, and other displays will all be
utilized together during the structural interpretation
procedure. Faults can be interpreted on both time
slices and vertical transects, and the results of inter-
pretation on one display can be viewed and used to
guide fault picking on the other. The ability to view
arbitrary lines through the seismic volume can, as
with stratigraphic interpretation, have a significant
beneficial impact on structural interpretations ŽFig.
13..
As with a stratigraphic interpretation, the struc-
tural interpretation begins by identifying the large

Fig. 15. Continuity cube Žsimilar to a Coherency Cubee. showing subtle faulting indicated by curvilinear trends of low coherence Ždark.
and poor data quality area. As with the horizon attribute maps, these cubes help interpreters to recognize subtle structural features that
otherwise might be undetected in vertical sections and time slices. Stratigraphic features, such as channels and reefs, can also sometimes be
delineated with continuityrcoherency cubes.
208 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218

scale faults, then successively mapping finer details.
Faults can generally be detected when the throw is
greater than 1r4 the wavelength ŽSheriff and Gel-
dart, 1995.. Subtle faults that are not easily recog-
nized on vertical transects can sometimes be detected
by generating and examining horizon attributes Že.g.,
Dalley et al., 1989; Hoetz and Watters, 1992; Hes-
thammer and Fossen, 1997a; Fig. 14.. These can
include dip Žin msrm., azimuth Ži.e., the direction
that the surface is pointing, ranging from 08 to 3608.,
edge detection Žemphasizing discontinuities. and
other properties. Depending on the orientation and
dip of the fault with respect to stratigraphic horizons,
any particular one of these displays might help to
detect subtle structures that might have a significant
impact on subsurface fluid flow.
Coherency Cubee processing Žand similar tech-
niques. generates a seismic attribute that quantifies
the similarity between a given seismic trace and its
neighbours ŽBahorich and Farmer, 1995.. This nu-
merical measure is somewhat analogous to the ‘re-
flection continuity’ that seismic interpreters have
been employing qualitatively for many years. When
the waveshape for a trace in a given time window is
similar to that for adjacent traces, as might be ex-
pected when the stratigraphy is continuous across an
area, the coherency attribute calculated at that posi-
tion is high. When there are significant differences
between traces, as might be expected where the
stratigraphy is offset by faulting, the coherency is
low. This type of data is derived from a 3-D seismic
volume, and can be viewed in the same way; typi-
cally cube displays or time slices are considered to
be most revealing ŽFig. 15.. This attribute can very
precisely and quickly reveal the location of subtle
faults or stratigraphic features that might be other-
wise missed.
3-D seismic analyses can often result in structure
maps that are significantly different from structure
maps based on 2-D seismic andror well control.
That these maps truly are more accurate than the
original maps has been empirically Žand frequently.
demonstrated by drilling results, and by integration
with other data types Že.g., Badgett et al., 1994;
Brown, 1996a; Weimer and Davis, 1996..
4.3. Rock properties
Definition of subsurface rock properties, such as
porosity or fluid saturation, directly from reflection
seismic data continues to be a field of significant
interest. Seismic inversion is a technique that at-
tempts to reconstruct the subsurface physical proper-
ties distribution, usually directly from the processed
seismic traces Že.g., Lindseth, 1979.. Many inversion
algorithms have been developed, but the inversion
process itself provides non-unique solutions —
sometimes many different stratigraphic successions
could have produced a given seismic section. Ac-
cordingly, interpreters generally attempt to constrain
the inversion process with physical property informa-
tion Ždensity, velocity. derived from well control.
Acoustic impedance volumes are generated for inter-
pretation in this way.

Fig. 16. Empirical, quantitative derivation of rock properties from seismic attributes. Ža. Values of selected attributes are extracted from the
bins that correspond to well locations, and crossplotted against well-derived measurements. In some cases, no correlation is present
ŽAttribute 1.. In other cases, there might be a negative correlation between attributes and log properties ŽAttribute 2. or a positive correlation
between the two ŽAttribute 3.. Linear and polynomial regression approaches might be tried. Žb. Relationships might be sought out between a
reservoir property and several attributes. Here, the 3-D graph, which can be interactively rotated, allows the interpreter to view statistical
relationships between three variables. The size of the data point is proportional to its closeness to the observer. This type of interactive data
exploration can help the interpreter to seek out correlations between seismic attributes and log-based physical properties. Multiple regression
techniques can be used to improve the correlation between seismic attributes and reservoir properties. Žc. Once an empirical, numerical
relationship between seismic attributes and rock properties has been established, it is used to assign rock properties to other areas within the
3-D survey area that lack well control. Here, a 2nd order multiple regression based on three attributes Žnot the three shown in Ža.. has been
employed to derive the thickness of the reservoir interval having a porosity greater than 12% Žcontours.. The underlying grey scale shows
structure, with structurally high areas being the lightest. Structure generally shows a dip from upper right to lower left. The thickest porous
section Ž) 20 m. is located beneath the structural culminations in this Jurassic shelf margin carbonate buildup Žcenter of map., although
some porosity also appears to be present on the seaward flank Žbottom. — possibly as talus accumulations. See Hart and Balch Ž1998. for
further discussion.
B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218 209
210 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
Complex trace attributes, such as amplitude, in-
stantaneous frequency, reflection strength and instan-
taneous phase and many others ŽTanner and Sheriff,
1977; Brown, 1996b. are currently being analyzed
and exploited qualitatively in the hopes that they
contain information about the physical properties of
the rocks being imaged. Although the analysis of
these attributes is not new, the degree of vigour with
which 3-D seismic interpreters are currently deriving
and exploiting them ŽHart, 1997. can be related to:
Ža. the direct way in which large amounts of digital
data can be analyzed, and Žb. the ability to link
log-derived physical properties from individual wells
to a specific traces in a spatially continuous 3-D
seismic volume. Seismic amplitudes are the most
readily imaged and qualitatively interpreted attribute
ŽEnachescu, 1993., although other attributes are ex-
ploited in a qualitative way as well Že.g., Hardage et
al., 1996., either individually or collectively. Non-
uniqueness of response Že.g., seismic amplitudes can
be affected by changes in porosity, bed thickness,
reflector geometry, fluid content, processing and
other variables. should be an important consideration
when interpreting such data.
Using a relatively new technique, growing num-
bers of interpreters are attempting to correlate seis-
mic attributes empirically with reservoir physical
properties measured by borehole logs ŽSchultz et al.,
1994.. The complex trace attributes potentially con-
tain information about the physical properties of the
rocks being imaged seismically, but the direct rela-
tionship between the rock properties and seismic
attributes may be practically impossible to derive
from first principles. The objective is to try to corre-
late physical properties, as measured from borehole
logs, with seismic attributes derived from the traces
that correspond to the boreholes. Different methods
are being utilized or developed, including multiple
regression, geostatistics, and neural networks first to
derive the relationships, and then to distribute prop-
erties throughout the area of the seismic survey ŽFig.
16..
Matteucci Ž1996. and others have identified sev-
eral aspects that need to be considered when adopt-
ing this approach. First and foremost, the correlation
between the attributes and physical properties must
be statistically significant. A prediction of reservoir
properties based on a quantitative, empirical relation-
ship is of limited value if the correlation coefficient
is too low. Second, the relationship should be statis-
tically robust and take into account uncertainties, for
example, in the exact borehole location or seismic
noise. The location of boreholes might be known
only to within a range of bins, especially if the wells
are old Žand poorly surveyed. or large offsets in
deviated wells are present. Using several adjacent
bins in the correlation exercise can, provided that the
reservoir is homogeneous enough, help to determine
the robustness of the correlation. Finally, the number
of attributes that can be generated is great, increasing
the probability that there will be at least one statisti-
cally significant, but possibly spurious, correlation
ŽKalkomey, 1997.. Additionally, Hirsche et al. Ž1997.
pointed out that limited well control or biased sam-
pling Žonly specific facies might be drilled. can
make it difficult to assess whether basic statistical
assumptions that underpin the utilization of these
methods are violated.
Ideally, the interpretation team might have a large
number of wells to work with. From these wells,
they can randomly exclude some from the calibration
process, then test the predictions of their work against
the data from the excluded wells Že.g., Schultz et al.,
1994.. This approach may not be feasible in areas of
limited well control Že.g., new or small fields.. One
of the fundamental questions that should be asked of
any rock properties prediction is whether the result
makes geologic sense. This is true regardless of how
the prediction is derived, or the strength of the
statistical correlation. The most prudent approach to
assessing these predictions is to view them as work-
ing hypotheses that: Ža. will help to assess the risk
associated with drilling a specific prospect, and Žb.
will need to be revised as new information becomes
available.
4.4. Integration
As is the case with any subsurface data, there is a
certain amount of ambiguity in the interpretation of
seismic data Ž2-D or 3-D. that cannot be removed by
working with it alone. These limitations are the
product of many factors, including the vertical reso-
lution and non-unique response of seismic data, ac-
quisition and processing programs, and interpreters’
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
skills or biases. As such, most interpreters recognize
that their seismic interpretations need to be inte-
grated with geologic and engineering data and con-
cepts in order to maximize the benefit that they
derive from a 3-D seismic volume ŽHart, 1997..
As noted previously, the integrated study might
include paleontologic, core, wireline log, production,
and other data types. Case studies presented by
Badgett et al. Ž1994., Hardage et al. Ž1994.,
Rafalowski et al. Ž1996. and Hart et al. Ž1997.
illustrate how 3-D seismic, core, wireline log, pres-
sure and production data are integrated with se-
quence stratigraphic, seismic attribute, production
and other analyses to generate holistic reservoir
models. Detailed analyses of the seismic data them-
selves, possibly including wavelet extraction, for-
ward modeling, phase correction and other steps, can
be employed to add confidence to the ties between
seismic and well data Že.g., Dorn et al., 1996..
Ideally, it would be possible to export a 3-D reser-
voir model populated with physical properties di-
rectly from the seismic analyses into a reservoir
simulator, but this type of activity is not yet com-
monplace ŽHart, 1997..
Integration is a key component in the developing
field of time-lapse or 4-D seismic analyses. This
type of analysis seeks to find differences in ampli-
tude Žor other attributes. from a given reservoir that
might be visible in successive 3-D seismic surveys
covering the same area, and then to relate these
differences to changes in pore fluids that are due to
production or enhanced recovery operations Že.g.,
Greaves and Fulp, 1987; Anderson et al., 1996.. This
approach is most widely used where amplitudes
Žbright spots. provide direct hydrocarbon indicators,
although applications of the technique to monitor
steamfloods or CO 2 injection programs have also
been undertaken ŽD. Lumley, personal communica-
tion, 1998..
5. Discussion
First conceived within large petroleum companies
in the early 1960s, it was not until the 1970s that 3-D
seismic concepts were publicly presented ŽWalton,
1972; French, 1974.. Documentation of 3-D seismic
success stories in the late 1970s Že.g., West, 1979. to
211
middle 1980s fueled interest in the technology. Al-
though much, if not most, of the ensuing drilling
success attributable to 3-D seismic has gone unre-
ported in the scientific literature Žthere are many case
histories in trade journals., the worth of the technol-
ogy is empirically demonstrated by a single statistic
that shows the extent to which the petroleum indus-
try has begun to focus on the technology: by the end
of 1996, 3-D surveys accounted for nearly 75% of all
seismic acquisition ŽSociety of Exploration Geo-
physics, 1997.. The application and development of
this technology has had a tremendous impact on the
petroleum industry, largely due to the precision and
accuracy with which stratigraphic and structural ele-
ments can be identified, mapped and drilled Že.g.,
Haldorsen and Damsleth, 1993; Sibley and Mastoris,
1994.. These same types of benefits should be realiz-
able in any geoscience discipline where the objective
is to characterize properly subsurface structure,
stratigraphy and sediment Žor rock. properties.
5.1. Non-petroleum applications
The cost of acquiring and processing 3-D seismic
data is no doubt the greatest impediment to the
development of more widespread application of the
technology. Additionally, relatively inexpensive PC-
based data visualization and interpretation packages
are making interpretation capabilities Žat least the
more commonly used applications. accessible to
greater numbers of potential users.
Eaton et al. Ž1997. performed cost–benefit analy-
ses to examine when the technology can be cost-ef-
fective in the mining industry, and also examined
some of the technical considerations related to seis-
mic imaging in plutonic environments, rather than
layered sedimentary successions. For example, they
noted that while most reflection seismic processing
is geared towards enhancing continuous features such
as bedding, in crystalline terranes scattering effects
from localized bodies are of paramount importance.
Unmigrated 3-D seismic volumes can help inter-
preters to recognize scattering anomalies produced
by features such as ore bodies, and may therefore be
of greater interest in the mining industry than mi-
grated volumes ŽEaton et al., 1997..
Cost was initially considered to be an obstacle to
the application of 3-D seismic in the environmental
industry ŽHouse et al., 1996., although recent experi-
212 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
mental studies are suggesting otherwise ŽSiahkoohi
and West, 1998.. Cost–savings realized by techno-
logical improvements Že.g., more cost-efficient ac-
quisition layouts. are likely to overcome this barrier,
especially in hydrogeology where aquifers are struc-
turally or stratigraphically complex, and the eco-
nomic considerations associated with water availabil-
ity or contamination are great. Problems associated
with obtaining high quality shallow seismic data
Žespecially in the vadose zone. are also currently an
impediment.
As an ‘academic’ discipline, structural geology
could benefit by more widespread application of 3-D
seismic data. Experience in the petroleum industry
has shown that many structural interpretations based
on 2-D seismic are wrong, to varying degrees Žtypi-
cally, fault geometries are oversimplified; e.g.,
Brown, 1996a; Mansfield, 1996.. Since 2-D seismic
based interpretations are used as input into kinematic
models, it may be desirable or even necessary to
revise some of the models to take into account new
details that could be provided by 3-D seismic map-
ping. In some cases, it will not be possible to derive
the true 3-D geometry Žand evolution. of these struc-
tures without 3-D seismic data. For example, Mans-
field Ž1996. and Rowan et al. Ž1998. demonstrated
how 3-D seismic data can be employed to under-
stand the spatial and temporal development of a
growth fault arrays. These types of analyses tradi-
tionally have been based on 2-D analyses Žseismic or
outcrop., either in section or plan, and case studies
that document the true 3-D geometry and evolution
of real fault arrays are rare.
Beginning in the 1970s, the development of seis-
mic stratigraphy Žand the offshoot of sequence
stratigraphy. as a mature science did much to revolu-
tionize and reinvigorate the field of stratigraphy. The
first order controls on depositional sequence archi-
tecture Žsea-level change, subsidence and sediment
supply. are fairly well established, although the rela-
tive importance of each and the nomenclature used
to describe successions of sedimentary rocks remain
topics of considerable debate. By providing a contin-
uous and accurate image of the subsurface, 3-D
seismic data have the potential to improve our under-
standing of some of the 2nd or higher order controls
on stratigraphic architecture. Although 3-D seismic
data are often collected over smaller areas than 2-D
seismic surveys, limiting their usefulness for regional
stratigraphic interpretations, the lateral continuity
provided by 3-D seismic will help stratigraphers to
better understand the controls of local processes such
as reactivation of basement tectonic elements, and
autocyclic lobe switching on depositional architec-
ture. Additionally, many studies have shown that
stratal geometries derived from 2-D seismic profiles
can be misleading, possibly leading to erroneous
reconstructions of depositional histories Že.g., Hart
and Long, 1996.. The integration of 3-D seismic data
into sequence stratigraphic studies will help to re-
duce these potential errors.
5.2. Limitations of 3-D seismic technology
Experience in the petroleum industry has shown
that, despite its general applicability, 3-D seismic
technology Žlike any technology. has its limitations.
These limitations can influence how a survey is
collected, processed and interpreted.
There are areas where good quality seismic data
Ž2-D or 3-D. are impossible or very difficult to
obtain. For example, velocity-related problems have,
until recently, prevented geophysicists from obtain-
ing clear subsurface images below salt bodies in the
Gulf of Mexico or beneath thrust sheets. New pro-
cessing flows, for example, pre-stack depth migra-
tion, are helping in some of these areas, however,
there remain areas where seismic acquisition is not
Ž?yet. feasible. Portions of North America’s Permian
Basin region fall into this category. In some areas of
this basin, unconsolidated Tertiary sediments overlie
and bury a dissolution surface developed on a Per-
mian aged salt zone. The thickness of the Tertiary
fill changes abruptly and there is a strong velocity
contrast between the fill and the underlying Paleo-
zoic rocks. For this reason, much energy is scattered
at this contact and the implementation of certain key
processing steps becomes problematic. As such, it is
not possible to obtain useable images of much of the
Paleozoic section.
In shallow earth applications, it is generally diffi-
cult to obtain good quality seismic data from uncon-
solidated or poorly consolidated soils that are above
the water table. These, and some other settings, are
considered to be ‘‘lossy’’ media Ži.e., much energy
is lost through attenuation as the acoustic pulse
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218 213

propagates. where it may be difficult or impossible In other areas, noise generated by waves, wind, or
to obtain interpretable seismic images. ‘‘cultural’’ features Že.g., working pumpjacks, road

Fig. 17. Example showing the effects of seismic processing on data interpretability. The images show a common vertical transect through
two different versions of a 3-D seismic volume. Both data versions began with the same field data input, but different processing flows were
applied Ždiscussion and analysis of the processing differences is beyond the scope of this paper.. The upper Žoriginal. image is difficult to
interpret above 600 ms ŽTWT., but after reprocessing Žlower image. the stratigraphy and structure in that part of the section become clearer.
Conversely, the reprocessed volume Žlower. has some of the higher frequencies removed, making stratigraphic details somewhat harder to
interpret in the lower part of the section.
214 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
traffic, electromagnetic emissions from power ca-
bles. can cause low signal-to-noise ratios that make
data difficult to interpret. Source testing, wherein
different types of source are tested to determine
which provides the best combination of frequency
and energy characteristics for a particular applica-
tion, and noise testing, looking at ambient and sys-
tem noise levels, can be used to help design survey
acquisition parameters or even determine whether it
is possible to collect usable seismic data.
Other concerns are related to acquisition parame-
ters Žsuch as survey design., processing parameters,
the subsurface geology, non-uniqueness of the seis-
mic response and, perhaps, the way that these ele-
ments interact. For example, the acquisition footprint
is an artifact characterized by patterns of noise in
3-D data that are related to the geometric distribution
of sources and receivers on the earths surface
ŽMarfurt et al., 1998.. This, and noise related to
other sources Že.g., multiples, diffractions, low fold
areas., can obscure stratigraphic and structural fea-
tures Že.g., Hesthammer and Fossen, 1997b. and
disrupt seismic attribute studies Že.g., Marfurt et al.,
1998..
As illustrated in Fig. 17, choices made during the
processing phase can significantly impact seismic
data interpretability. Older seismic data sets Žboth
2-D and 3-D. are sometimes reprocessed using dif-
ferent parameters to enhance interpretability Že.g.,
Hesthammer and Fossen, 1997a.. Processing can
affect the quality of the final data volume for a
number of reasons. Two of the more important as-
pects include the experience of the processors in
working with data from a particular area Že.g., there
might be velocity problems or multiples that a pro-
cessor with experience from that area might know
how to handle., and the choice of processing algo-
rithms Žoften the better algorithms take more com-
puter time and are therefore more costly..
Assuming that the data set has been satisfactorily
acquired and processed, there are still aspects of the
interpretation phase that can affect the validity of the
results. The most obvious of these are the inter-
preters capabilities and experience working with 3-D
seismic data and the software used in the interpreta-
tion. Various types of pitfalls can confront even an
experienced interpreter. Velocity related problems
Že.g., a horizontal layer might appear to be ‘‘pulled
up’’ on a seismic transect beneath a region that has
fast velocities. are a common type of pitfall, and can
be most problematic when available velocity control
is limited and lateral lithologic changes and depths
are great. Depth migration converts the z axis of the
seismic volume from time to depth Žeither pre- or
post-stack., but the quality of the result depends on
the accuracy of the velocity model used during the
migration. Experience, and an understanding of the
principles of geology and geophysics can help the
interpreter to watch out for these and other types of
interpretation problems.
Finally, within the petroleum industry there is
general recognition of the limitations of 3-D seismic
technology, and these limitations need to be remem-
bered if, or when, the technology is applied in other
fields. For example, in addition to the artifacts and
pitfalls just described, practical limits on vertical and
lateral resolution can make targets impossible to
identify in seismic data. Improper survey design and
excessive cost cutting during acquisition and pro-
cessing have been known to lead to poor data quality
and failure in the petroleum industry. The geology of
an area and the project economics need to be charac-
terized up front, in order to properly design a 3-D
survey or, indeed, to decide whether a 3-D seismic
survey is worth acquiring. Likewise, although 3-D
seismic data can provide some valuable insights
compared to 2-D seismic or well data, it is only
through the integration of multidisciplinary data sets
and concepts Že.g., pressures, borehole logs, core,
geochemical analyses. that the full benefits of 3-D
seismic technology are realized. No matter how
widespread the technology has become in the
petroleum industry, economic, technical or other ob-
stacles can cause 3-D seismic to be an impractical
tool for studying the subsurface. Overcoming these
obstacles will continue to be a topic of considerable
interest.
6. Conclusions
This summary has endeavoured to illustrate how
3-D seismic technology is applied in the petroleum
industry and to suggest that similar approaches might
be undertaken in other branches of the earth sci-
ences. Although a 3-D seismic data volume provides
a tremendous amount of information about the sub-
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
surface structure, stratigraphy and rock properties, it
is only through integration of these geophysical data
with other geologic and engineering data and con-
cepts that the true potential of the technology is
unlocked. The quality and continuity of the subsur-
face image obtained with a properly acquired 3-D
survey, combined with the flexible data visualization
and interpretation capabilities of interpretation soft-
ware and data integration, help petroleum geoscien-
tists to produce the world’s hydrocarbon resources
more economically and efficiently. These, or similar
benefits may be realizable in other applied and fun-
damental branches of the geosciences.
Acknowledgements
The material presented in this paper is derived
from the author’s own published and unpublished
research, and from examples and concepts presented
in the literature. Geographic coordinates for some of
the illustrations have been deliberately disguised or
omitted to conserve the confidentiality of the data.
Support for the author’s current research comes from
the AdÕanced ReserÕoir Management Project of Los
Alamos National Laboratory, the Southwest Section
of the Petroleum Technology Transfer Council, and
the New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Re-
sources. Data sets and technical guidance have been
provided by Amoco, Ardent Resources, Cross Tim-
bers Oil, Harvey E. Yates, Marathon, and Smacko
Operating. Interpretation software has been provided
to the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technol-
ogy by Landmark Graphics Corporation.
Appendix A. Glossary of some commonly used
terms in 3-D seismic interpretation
This Appendix provides definitions for some terms
in 3-D seismic technology based on common usage
by interpreters. Some of these terms have other
meanings in the field of reflection seismology.
Arbitrary line r transect — A vertical seismic
transect through a 3-D seismic volume, the location,
orientation and length of which is defined freely by
the interpreter.
215
Autotracking — Automated picking of a seismic
horizon throughout a 3-D seismic volume based on
seed points provided by the interpreter. Picking pa-
rameters are set by the interpreter. This process is
used to provide a continuous horizon pick more
rapidly than could be achieved through manual pick-
ing. Despite the time efficiency, results of autotrack-
ing applications need to be quality checked by inter-
preters, especially in areas of complex geology or
poor data quality.
Bin — A rectangular area in the x, y plane
Žhorizontal. that is represented by a single seismic
trace in a 3-D volume. Bin dimensions are deter-
mined by acquisition parameters, and each bin can
be identified by a specific combination of line and
trace numbers.
Coherency attribute — An attribute defined by
comparing a seismic trace with its neighbours over a
sliding time window in order to numerically define
the lateral trace continuity at that location. This
attribute is commonly used to define discontinuities
that can be due to faulting or stratigraphic features
Že.g., channel or reef margins.. The term Coherency
Cubee refers to a technology that has been patented
by Amoco, but other companies have developed
similar attributes Žmost of which are proprietary..
Complex trace attribute — A seismic attribute
Že.g., instantaneous phase, instantaneous frequency.
that is derived from the Hilbert transform.
Crossline (trace) — One of the two sequentially
numbered orthogonal reference coordinates for 3-D
seismic surveys Žthe other being the linerinline.. For
land surveys, the crossline orientation is typically the
direction in which source lines were laid out.
Fault slice — Amplitudes extracted along the
plane of a fault, and viewed projected onto a vertical
plane.
Fold (multiplicity) — The number of field traces
sharing a common midpoint that are stacked together
during data processing to produce a single trace in
the final data volume. All else being equal, the
higher the fold, the better the data quality. The fold
may not be constant throughout the entire area of a
3-D survey.
Horizon — A seismic pick that typically corre-
sponds to a particular stratigraphic level Že.g., the top
of a formation..
216 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
Horizon attributes — Attributes that are derived
from and define geometric properties of a picked,
continuous horizon, such as dip, azimuth, edge de-
tection, etc.
Horizon slice — Instantaneous amplitudes ex-
tracted along a horizon and displayed in a map view.
Inline (line) — One of the two sequentially num-
bered orthogonal reference coordinates for 3-D seis-
mic surveys Žthe other being the tracercrossline..
For land surveys, the inline orientation is typically
the direction in which receiver cables were laid out.
InterÕal attribute — A seismic attribute Že.g.,
average frequency, average amplitude. that is de-
rived for an interval that is defined either by two
horizons or a user selected time window defined
with respect to one horizon.
Migration — A seismic processing step which is
used to reposition reflected energy to its true subsur-
face location Žthus, eliminating sideswipe., collapse
diffractions and shrink the Fresnel zone. 3-D migra-
tion produces a seismic image that is more accurate
than an equivalent 2-D image.
Multipanel display — A display that consists of
two or more contiguous vertical transects Žtypically
arbitrary lines. through a 3-D seismic volume.
Patch — In land 3-D seismic acquisition, a rect-
angular series of geophones that record reflections
from a shotpoint that is typically located near the
center of the patch.
PerspectiÕe display — A display that shows ob-
jects from a seismic survey, typically interpreted
horizons and faults, in pseudo 3-D form. These
displays can be rotated Ži.e., viewed from any angle.
and are useful visualization tools for quality check-
ing interpretations or presenting results.
Sideswipe — Reflected energy that comes from
objects to the side of the vertical plane that is
intended to be imaged in a 2-D seismic transect.
Sideswipe is eliminated during 3-D migration.
Synthetic seismogram — Seismic traces gener-
ated by mathematically convolving a seismic wavelet
with a time series of reflection coefficients that has
been derived from well log data Žvelocity and den-
sity logs.. These ‘‘synthetics’’ are used to predict the
seismic response at a borehole location and thus tie
log-derived geologic information to the seismic data.
Time lapse (4-D) seismic — The use of different
vintages of 3-D seismic data covering a constant
area to monitor changes in subsurface conditions. A
common example is the use of changes in seismic
amplitudes through time to monitor changes in the
location of an oilrwater contact that are due to
production.
Timeslice — A slice through a 3-D seismic vol-
ume at a constant TWT. Since subsurface velocities
may vary laterally, a constant TWT does not neces-
sarily represent a constant subsurface depth.
Velocity surÕey — Determination of the subsur-
face velocity field, usually by lowering a receiver
down a borehole to different depths, generating an
acoustic pulse at the surface, then measuring the
vertical traveltime to the receiver.
Vertical seismic profile (VSP) — A seismic pro-
file that is collected in a manner somewhat analo-
gous to a velocity survey, but with more recording
depths. Longer recording times are analyzed in order
to detect reflected energy from subsurface interfaces,
and not just first arrivals. Processing transforms the
raw data into seismic traces that: Ža. show the seis-
mic response in the vicinity of the borehole, Žb. can
be directly tied to other borehole information Že.g.,
wireline logs., and Žc. can be displayed in either time
or depth.
Voxel — A ‘‘ volume element’’ defined by the
bin size Žin the x, y plane. and the sampling interval
Žin the z direction.. For conventional 3-D seismic
volumes, each voxel stores a numerical amplitude
value.
References
Anderson, R.N., Boulanger, A., He, W., Sun, Y.F., Xu, L., Hart,
B.S., 1996. 4-D seismic monitoring of drainage in the Eugene
Island 330 Field in the Offshore Gulf of Mexico. In: Weimer,
P., Davis, T. ŽEds.., Applications of 3-D Seismic Data to
Exploration and Production, Vol. 42. AAPG Studies in Geol-
ogy Series, pp. 9–19.
Arestad, J.F., Davis, T.L., Benson, R.D., 1996. Utilizing 3-D, 3-C
seismology for reservoir property characterization at Joffre
Field, Alberta, Canada. In: Weimer, P., Davis, T. ŽEds..,
Applications of 3-D Seismic Data to Exploration and Produc-
tion, Vol. 42. AAPG Studies in Geology Series, pp. 171–178.
Badgett, K.L., Hill, P.L., Mills, W.H., Mitchell, S.P., Vinson,
G.S. III, Wilkins, K.L., 1994. Team combines technologies to
target horizontal wells in Gulf of Mexico Oil Field. Oil Gas J.
14, 44–49.
Bahorich, M., Farmer, S., 1995. 3-D seismic discontinuity for
faults and stratigraphic features: the coherence cube. The
Leading Edge 14, 1053–1058.
 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
Bouvier, J.D., Kaars-Sijpesteijn, C.H., Kluesner, D.F., Onye-
jekwe, C.C., Van der Pal, R.C., 1989. Three-dimensional
seismic interpretation and fault sealing investigations, Nun
River Field, Nigeria. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 73, 1397–
1414.
Brown, A.R., 1996a. Interpretation of 3-dimensional seismic data,
4th edn. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Mem-
oir 42, 436 pp.
Brown, A.R., 1996b. Seismic attributes and their classification.
The Leading Edge 15, 1090.
Crawley Stewart, C.L., 1995. 3-D solution to a 2-D pitfall:
seismic detection of carbonate buildups, Kiva Field, Paradox
Basin, San Juan County, Utah. In: Ray, R.R. ŽEd.., High-defi-
nition Seismic: 2-D, 2-D Swath, and 3-D Case Histories.
Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists, Denver, pp. 177–
183.
Cross, T.A., Lessenger, M.A., 1988. Seismic stratigraphy. Annu.
Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 16, 319–354.
Dalley, R.M., Gevers, E.C.A., Stampfli, G.M., Davies, D.J.,
Gastaldi, C.N., Ruijtenberg, P.A., Vermeer, G.J.O., 1989. Dip
and azimuth displays for 3-D seismic interpretation. First
Break 7, 86–95.
Dorn, G.A., 1998. Modern 3-D seismic interpretation. The Lead-
ing Edge 17, 1262–1272.
Dorn, G.A., Tubman, K.M., Cooke, D., O’Connor, R., 1996.
Geophysical reservoir characterization of Pickerill Field, North
Sea, using 3-D seismic and well data. In: Weimer, P., Davis,
T. ŽEds.., Applications of 3-D Seismic Data to Exploration
and Production, Vol. 42. AAPG Studies in Geology Series, pp.
107–122.
Eaton, D.W., Milkereit, B., Adam, E., 1997. 3-D seismic explo-
ration. In: Gubins, A.G. ŽEd.., Proceedings of Exploration 97:
Fourth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Explo-
ration, pp. 65–78.
Enachescu, M.E., 1993. Amplitude interpretation of 3-D reflection
data. The Leading Edge 12, 678–685.
French, W.S., 1974. Two-dimensional and three-dimensional mi-
gration of model-experiment reflection profiles. Geophysics
39, 265–277.
Greaves, R.J., Fulp, T.J., 1987. Three-dimensional seismic moni-
toring of an enhanced oil recovery process. Geophysics 52,
1175–1187.
Haldorsen, H.H., Damsleth, E., 1993. Challenges in reservoir
characterization. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 77, 541–551.
Hardage, B.A., Levey, Pendleton, V., Simmons, J.L. Jr., Edson,
1994. 3-D seismic case history evaluating fluvially deposited
thin-bed reservoirs in a gas-producing property. Geophysics
59, 1650–1665.
Hardage, B.A., Carr, D.L., Lancaster, D.E., Simmons, J.L. Jr.,
Hamilton, D.S., Elphick, R.Y., Oliver, K.L., Johns, R.A.,
1996. 3-D seismic imaging and seismic attribute analysis of
genetic sequences deposited in low-accommodation condi-
tions. Geophysics 61, 1351–1362.
Hart, B.S., 1997. 3-D seismic: what makes interpreters tick?. The
Leading Edge 16, 1114–1119.
Hart, B.S., Balch, R.S., 1998. Approaches to defining reservoir
physical properties from 3-D seismic attributes with limited
217
well control: an example from the Jurassic Smackover Forma-
tion, Alabama. In: DeMis, W.D., Nelis, M.K. ŽEds.., The
Search Continues into the 21st Century, Vol. 98–105. West
Texas Geological Society Publ., pp. 207–212.
Hart, B.S., Long, 1996. Forced regressions and lowstand deltas:
Holocene Canadian examples. J. Sediment. Res. 66, 820–829.
Hart, B.S., Copley, D., Loewenstein, S., 1996. Forging partner-
ships: chasing the Rose Run Play with 3-D seismic in the
Empire State. Oil Gas J. 94 Ž42., 88–91.
Hart, B.S., Sibley, D.M., Flemings, P.B., 1997. Seismic stratigra-
phy, facies architecture and reservoir character of a Pleis-
tocene shelf margin delta complex, Eugene Island Block 330
Field, Louisiana Offshore. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 81,
380–397.
Hesthammer, J., Fossen, H., 1997a. Seismic attribute analysis in
structural interpretation of the Gullfaks Field, northern North
Sea. Pet. Geosci. 3, 13–26.
Hesthammer, J., Fossen, H., 1997b. The influence of seismic
noise in structural interpretation of seismic attribute maps.
First Break 15, 209–219.
Hirsche, K., Porter-Hirsche, J., Mewhort, L., Davis, R., 1997. The
use and abuse of geostatistics. The Leading Edge 16, 253–260.
Hoetz, H.L.J.G., Watters, D.G., 1992. Seismic horizon attribute
mapping for the Annerveen Gasfield, the Netherlands. First
Break 10, 41–51.
House, J.R., Boyd, T.M., Haeni, F.P., 1996. Haddam Meadows,
Connecticut: a case study for the acquisition, processing, and
relevance of 3-D seismic data as applied to the remediation of
DNAPL contamination. In: Weimer, P., Davis, T. ŽEds..,
Applications of 3-D Seismic Data to Exploration and Produc-
tion, Vol. 42. AAPG Studies in Geology Series, pp. 257–266.
Isaac, J.H., Stewart, R.R., 1993. 3-D seismic expression of a
cryptoexplosion structure. Can. J. Explor. Geophys. 29, 429–
439.
Jackson, W., Hilterman, F., 1979. Use of seismic modeling for
reef exploration in Michigan Basin. Geophysical Develop-
ment, unpublished report.
Kalkomey, C.T., 1997. Potential risks when using seismic at-
tributes as predictors of reservoir properties. The Leading
Edge, pp. 247–251.
Kanasewich, E.R. et al., 1987. Seismic studies of the crust under
the Williston Basin. Can. J. Earth Sci. 24, 2160–2171.
Kanasewich, E.R., Burianyk, M.J.A., Dubuc, G.P., Lemieux, J.F.,
Kalantzis, F., 1995. Three-dimensional seismic reflection stud-
ies of the Alberta basement. Can. J. Explor. Geophys. 31,
1–10.
Lindseth, R.O., 1979. Synthetic sonic logs — a process for
stratigraphic interpretation. Geophysics 44, 3–26.
Mansfield, C.S., 1996. Fault displacement distributions: insights
using high-resolution 3-D seismic data. In: Weimer, P., Davis,
T. ŽEds.., Applications of 3-D Seismic Data to Exploration
and Production, Vol. 42. AAPG Studies in Geology Series, pp.
231–236.
Marfurt, K.J., Scheet, R.M., Sharp, J.A., Harper, M.G., 1998.
Suppression of the acquisition footprint for seismic sequence
attribute mapping. Geophysics 63, 1024–1035.
Matteucci, G., 1996. Seismic attribute analysis and calibration: a
218 B.S. Hart r Earth-Science ReÕiews 47 (1999) 189–218
general procedure and a case study. SEG Annual Meeting,
Expanded Abstracts, pp. 373–376.
Mitchum, R.M., Vail, P.R., Thompson, S., 1977. The depositional
sequence as a basic unit for stratigraphic analysis. In: Payton,
C.E. ŽEd.., Seismic Stratigraphy — Applications to Hydrocar-
bon Exploration. AAPG Memoir 26, pp. 53–62.
Rafalowski, J.W., Regel, B.W., Jordan, D.L., Lucidi, D.O., 1996.
Green Canyon Block 205: lithofacies, seismic facies and reser-
voir architecture, In: Weimer, P., Davis, T. ŽEds.., Applica-
tions of 3-D Seismic Data to Exploration and Production, Vol.
42. AAPG Studies in Geology Series, pp. 133–142.
Ray, R., 1995. Utilizing seismic for higher definition of geologic
prospects: 2-D, 2-D swath, and 3-D seismic. In: Ray, R.R.
ŽEd.., High-definition Seismic: 2-D, 2-D Swath, and 3-D Case
Histories. Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists, Denver,
pp. 1–6.
Rowan, M.G., Hart, B.S., Nelson, S., Flemings, P.B., Trudgill,
B.D., 1998. Three-dimensional geometry and evolution of a
salt-related growth-fault array: EI 330 Field, offshore
Louisiana, Gulf of Mexico. Mar. Pet. Geol. 15, 309–328.
Sarg, J.F., 1987. Carbonate sequence stratigraphy. In: Wilgus,
C.K., et al. ŽEds.., Sea-level Changes — An Integrated Ap-
proach, Vol. 42. SEPM Special Publication, pp. 155–181.
Schultz, P.S., Ronen, S., Hattori, M., Corbett, C., 1994. Seismic-
guided estimation of log properties: Part 1. A data-driven
interpretation methodology. The Leading Edge, pp. 305–315.
Sheriff, R.L., Geldart, 1995. Exploration Seismology, 2nd edn.
Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, 592 pp.
Shipley, T.H., Moore, G.F., Bangs, N.L., Moore, J.C., Scoffa,
P.L., 1994. Seismically inferred dilatancy distribution, north-
ern Barbados Ridge decollement: implications for fluid migra-
tion and fault strength. Geology 22, 411–414.
Siahkoohi, H.R., West, G.F., 1998. 3-D seismic imaging of
complex structures in glacial deposits. Geophysics 63, 1041–
1052.
Sibley, D.M., Mastoris, S.S., 1994. Rethinking conventional field
development: 3-D shows direct detection of bypassed oil
reserves. In: Society of Petroleum Engineers International
Petroleum Conference and Exhibition of Mexico Proceedings,
SPE Paper 28719, pp. 509–519.
Society of Exploration Geophysics, 1997. SEG seismic activity
survey. The Leading Edge 16, 77–78.
Tanner, M.T., Sheriff, R.E., 1977. Application of amplitude fre-
quency and other attributes to stratigraphic and hydrocarbon
determination. In: Payton, C.E. ŽEd.., Seismic Stratigraphy —
Applications to Hydrocarbon Exploration. American Associa-
tion of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 26, Tulsa, pp. 301–327.
Vincelette, R.R., Chittum, W.E., 1981. Exploration for oil accu-
mulations in Entrada Sandstone, San Juan Basin, New Mexico.
Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 65, 2546–2570.
Walton, G.G., 1972. Three-dimensional seismic method. Geo-
physics 37, 417–430.
Weimer, P., Davis, T., 1996. Applications of 3-D seismic data to
exploration and production, Vol. 42. AAPG Studies in Geol-
ogy Series, 270 pp.
West, J., 1979. Development near for Thailand field. Oil Gas J. 77
Ž32., 74–76.