Chapter 7: A Processing Comparison
AVO exploration leading to the discovery of a field is described in this case history. Processing of the subtle amplitude response at the prospect using three different processing streams led to different results.
Field analogs can determine the type and strength of the AVO anomaly expected at a prospect in the same trend.
AVO anomalies that are not strongly developed can be changed and even eliminated by variations in the processing stream.
Good communication between the processor and interpreter is needed to incorporate acquisition and processing information into AVO interpretation.
Dip filters applied to CMP gathers to remove multiples can change relative amplitudes.
Figures & Tables
Amplitude Variation with Offset: Gulf Coast Case Studies
A cursory look at the contents of the book might lead the reader to belive that AVO is not a successful hydrocarbon indicator, as we show many examples of AVO predictions gone awry, and dry holes drilled based on AVO anomalies. However, a closer look at the pages will give the reader the message we are trying to convey: used properly and cautiously, AVO can be a valuable tool for direct detection. The preponderance of unhappy endings in the book is unavoidable, as the goal of this book is to provide information that may prevent other dry holes being drilled. Inevitably, the best lessons are learned from mistakes, a statement that applies to life in general as well as to seismic interpretation.