Abstract
As a seasoned interpreter, Sam often has been asked to evaluate the quality of seismic data and interpretations based on those data; interestingly enough, he has not been asked for his opinion on the range of possible meanings for the word “quality.” When discussing seismic data quality, he employs a system of three quality elements that he learned from Mike Schoenberger, SEG past president and continuing education course instructor. The three elements are: detection (signal/noise), resolution, and image fidelity (event focusing and positioning). This system has served Sam well, although he can't say that everyone has always agreed with his assessment of data quality. Matters become geometrically more complicated when evaluating the quality of an interpretation because so many intangibles, such as the experience and temperament of the interpreter, as well as business factors, such as project objectives and schedule, workstation resources, and the phase of the moon, come into play. For today, we're not going to run the gauntlet of assessing interpretation quality.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
