Abstract
Seismic acquisition and the resulting seismic images have evolved considerably from analogue single-fold shooting, to 2D CDP shooting in the 1960s and 1970s, to 3D seismic onshore and offshore, and all the way to modern high density, wide-azimuth methods. Sources and receivers have also evolved substantially through this time period; but are the advances in acquisition equipment the main reason for the step change in data quality that we see? We believe that evolution in acquisition geometries and resulting increases in trace density have had a much bigger effect. We have seen step changes in data quality as we move from 2D to 3D, then denser and denser wide azimuth geometries which have recently been augmented with simultaneous source acquisition. So is the detail of the acquisition method the key for success, or is it a simple case of “get as many measurements per km as possible”?
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.
