3 ms·

You make some great points. Certainly it’s useful for lots of other cases - I was just considering it from an E&P perspective. They already have numerous surve

You make some great points. Certainly it’s useful for lots of other cases - I was just considering it from an E&P perspective. They already have numerous surveys and lines throughout those areas. My first job out of college I processed and archived several warehouses of data going back to some of the very first analog signals recorded, TI’s first digital tapes (named GSI at the time) and also digitized paper records from the 1920s. Great first job that exposed me to massive data and algorithms!

doodlebugging 8y ago
Thanks. I would've loved to work with that ancient data. I think one of the biggest challenges as a processor is to understand all the information in the observe reports and how it relates to handling things like field source and receiver geometry, noise issues during acquisition, etc. I imagine that the oldest stuff was treated like a science project with everything notable recorded in detail for future reference. I know that by the 1960's field crews had pretty standard notes they would take. Later in the 70's, as activity picked up before the big bust in 81-82 things became almost sloppy so that it took a lot more effort to figure out what actually happened during acquisition. I worked on field crews back then and one of our observers would fill out his paperwork the night before while he had a few beers and smoked all kinds of things. Then the next day he would just make quick notes if something ended up different. Too bad that when wasn't diligent at modifying his pre-written reports. The prevailing belief on the field crews was that someone would figure it all out in processing later so if they didn't get it right during acquisition we could always fix it. Some of the best projects I worked on as a processor involved unraveling the chains of errors in documentation to improve imaging of old surveys.

doodlebugging 8y ago

Thanks. I would've loved to work with that ancient data. I think one of the biggest challenges as a processor is to understand all the information in the observe reports and how it relates to handling things like field source and receiver geometry, noise issues during acquisition, etc. I imagine that the oldest stuff was treated like a science project with everything notable recorded in detail for future reference. I know that by the 1960's field crews had pretty standard notes they would take. Later in the 70's, as activity picked up before the big bust in 81-82 things became almost sloppy so that it took a lot more effort to figure out what actually happened during acquisition. I worked on field crews back then and one of our observers would fill out his paperwork the night before while he had a few beers and smoked all kinds of things. Then the next day he would just make quick notes if something ended up different. Too bad that when wasn't diligent at modifying his pre-written reports. The prevailing belief on the field crews was that someone would figure it all out in processing later so if they didn't get it right during acquisition we could always fix it. Some of the best projects I worked on as a processor involved unraveling the chains of errors in documentation to improve imaging of old surveys.