Abstract

Kirchhoff migration has traditionally been the leading implementation for application of depth migration to seismic data. There are many reasons for this, such as efficiency, ability to image steep and even overhanging dips, and flexibility. And in most parts of the world Kirchhoff migration produces images that are as good as, or better, than the more expensive implementations using downward continuation algorithms. However, the limitations of Kirchhoff migration are well known and its inability to image more than a single arrival is the most damaging. Downward continuation algorithms, on the other hand, handle all arrivals but their inability to image steep dips is a severe limitation.