The figures above shows the local structural dip applied in three different methods which are event dip, gradient dip and principal component dip at Inline 959.

​

For the event dip method, the horizons can be seen clearly. However, the fault is not so obvious. Thus, the event dip method could show stratigraphy better than structures.​

​

For the gradient dip method, the horizons can still be seen clearly. The fault can also be seen clearly compared to the event dip method. Therefore, the gradient dip has better resolution compared to the event dip since both the stratigraphy and structural are obvious, hence making the interpretation easier.

​

For the principal component dip, the horizons are not clearly seen. However, the fault can be seen slightly. The principal component dip does not show the structures or the stratigraphy in clear observations as the data is blurry hence there still could be unwanted noise or artifacts.