Journal of Sedimentary Research, 2011, v. 81, 339347 Research Article DOI: 10.2110/jsr.2011.

31

LIDAR INTENSITY AS A REMOTE SENSOR OF ROCK PROPERTIES

DARRIN BURTON, DALLAS B. DUNLAP, LESLI J. WOOD,
AND

PETER P. FLAIG

Bureau of Economic Geology, 10100 Burnet Road, Austin, Texas 78758, U.S.A. e-mail: darrinburton@hotmail.com

ABSTRACT: Lidar collects high-resolution spatial data, making it a popular tool for outcrop investigations; however, few of these studies utilize lidars spectral capability. Lidar scanners commonly collect intensity returns (power returned/power emitted) that are influenced primarily by distance and target reflectivity, with lesser influence from angle of incidence, roughness, and environmental conditions. Application of distance normalization results in values that approximate target reflectivity. At the near-infrared wavelength of lidar, quartz-rich sandstones are more reflective than clay-rich mudstones. Scans of unweathered core and weathered outcrop were collected to investigate the relationship between lithology and lidar intensity. In unweathered, laboratory samples, intensity shows an inverse relationship to wt. % clay and are positively correlated to wt. % combined quartz, plagioclase, and K-feldspar. A similar relationship was also observed in scans of lightly weathered outcrop, although weathering and moisture diminished intensity contrast between sand-rich and shale-rich intervals. Thus, lidar intensity is a possible remote sensor of lithology, particularly in remotely located and inaccessible outcrops.

INTRODUCTION

Terrestrial lidar (light detection and ranging) has become a popular tool for outcrop investigation and modeling (Bellian et al. 2005; McCaffrey et al. 2005; Pringle et al. 2006; Trinks et al. 2005; Bonnaffe et al. 2007; Labourdette and Jones 2007; Buckley et al. 2008; White and Jones 2008; Jones et al. 2009; Rotevatn et al. 2009; Klise et al. 2009; Wawryzniec et al. 2009). Lidar uses the time of flight and angle of emission to accurately (within centimeters) calculate the x, y, and z location of a point on a targeted surface. Lidar scanners can collect thousands of points per second, allowing the rapid compilation of a cloud of points approximating the shape of the targeted surface (Optech 2009). Point clouds are used to generate digital outcrop models (DOMs) that allow geologists to better quantify and better reproduce the results of traditional outcrop studies (Bellian et al. 2005). Producing highresolution (centimeter or greater) DOMs, which can cover kilometers of continuous outcrop, has greatly contributed to the popularity of lidar as a tool for geologic investigation (Jones et al. 2008; Jones et al. 2009). Digital outcrop models are ideal for reservoir studies because they enable geologists to simultaneously study the outcrop at a variety of scales and viewing angles in a virtual environment, while allowing the investigator to quantify and spatially reference stratigraphic geometries and relationships (Pringle et al. 2006; Enge et al. 2007; Janson et al. 2007; Pranter et al. 2007; Jones et al. 2008; Rotevatn et al. 2009). Lidar data have been used to extract detailed measurements of both structural (Ahlgren and Holmlund 2003; Rotevatn et al. 2009; Jones et al. 2008; Olariu et al 2008) and stratigraphic features (Bellian et al. 2005; Janson et al 2007; Lee et al. 2007; Jones et al. 2008; Klise et al. 2009). Digitally recorded data can be used to condition reservoir models (Pringle et al. 2006; Enge et al. 2007; Janson et al. 2007; Pranter et al. 2007; Jones et al. 2008; Rotevatn et al. 2009) and forward seismic models to outcrop data (Janson et al. 2007).

FIG. 1.NASA JPL library spectroscopy (from Baldridge et al. 2008), solid sample data showing median (solid line) and quartiles (dashed lines) for shale (gray) and sandstone (black). The central dashed line is approximates the wavelength of terrestrial lidar. Note the spectral separability between sandstones and shale at lidar wavelengths.

Copyright E 2011, SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology)

1527-1404/11/081-339/$03.00

340

D. BURTON ET AL.

JSR

FIG. 2.The maximum, average, and minimum intensity series from outcrop data for A) raw data, B) Optech Irlis 3D software, and C) statistical distance normalization. Normalization produced more consistent intensity values with respect to distance. The gap in the series from 190 m to 260 m is the location of the Sagavanirktok River, with a gravel bar from 100 m to 190 m and the outcrop from 260 m to 445 m.

In addition to providing detailed spatial data, lidar scanners record the intensity: the power of the backscattered signal relative to the power of the emitted signal (Song et al. 2002; Pfeifer et al. 2008). The strength of the reflected signal is related to the geometry between the laser emitter and the targeted surface, and the reflective character of the target at the wavelength of the laser (Lutz et al. 2003; Ahokas et al. 2006; Coren and Sterazi 2006; Hasegawa 2006; Mazzarini et al. 2006; Starek et al. 2006; Hofle and Pfiefer 2007; Kukko et al. 2008; Pesci et al. 2008). Geometric variables, such as range to the target and angle of incidence, can be largely corrected for use in physical or data-driven models (Song et al. 2002; Luzum et al. 2004; Ahokas et al 2006; Mazzarini et al. 2006; Hofle and Pfiefer 2007; Kaasalinen et al. 2008). Geometrically normalized intensities are proportional to target reflectivity (Song et al. 2002; Ahokas

et al. 2006; Coren and Sterazi 2006; Pfiefer et al. 2008); therefore, materials with different reflective properties can be distinguished by variation in the intensity (Song et al. 2002; Lutz et al. 2003; Ahokas et al. 2006; Brennan and Webster 2006; Starek et al. 2006; Hofle and Pfiefer 2007). Intensity has been used as a remote sensing and surface classification tool in archeology (Coren et al. 2005), forestry (Brennan and Webster 2006; Donoghue et al. 2007; Antonarakis et al. 2008), glaciology (Lutz et al. 2003), volcanology (Mazzarini et al. 2006; Pesci et al. 2008), hydrology (Klise et al. 2009), and other fields of study (Song et al. 2002; Luzum et al. 2004; Hasegawa et al. 2006; Long et al. 2006; Chust et al. 2008; Wawrzyniec et al. 2009). However, lidar-based outcrop studies have largely ignored intensity data, focusing primarily on spatial information.

JSR

LIDAR INTENSITY AND ROCK PROPERTIES

341

FIG. 3.Boxes of core were used in experiment 1. A) Shale in the core corresponds to low intensities B) The intensity grayscale is 0 (black) to 255 (white).

The use of lidar for surface classification of lithology is a largely undeveloped application of lidar mapping techniques. Pesci et al. (2006) used intensity to map and identify different stratigraphic units exposed in the walls of a volcanic crater. Their study shows that intensity is firmly related to the physical and chemical properties of the reflecting target. They also suggest that stratigraphic studies using intensity can be extended to nonvolcanic outcrops. Bellian et al. (2005) used intensity in combination with other attributes to enhance detection of lithologic variation. Klise et al. (2009) showed that intensity and multiscan stacking easily differentiates gravel from sandy facies. Another recent study showed an inverse linear correlation between intensity and the hydrogen weight percent (clay content proxy) in a carbonate-dominated succession (Franceschi et al. 2009). All of these studies point to lidar intensity as a potential technique for discriminating lithology. Understanding the apparent relationship between rock properties and intensity could greatly increase the value of lidar data in outcrop studies.
ROCK-PROPERTY CONTROLS ON REFLECTIVITY

and weathered surfaces, normalizing for distance, and comparing normalized intensity to lithology. Fresh rock samples came from subsurface core, and outcrops were scanned to investigate intensity returns from weathered surfaces.
METHODS

Reflectance of a granular surface is complexly controlled by the composition of individual grains, their weight fraction, and grain size (Clark and Roush 1984; Clark 1999; Bowitz and Ehling 2008). When photons emitted from the lidar laser source encounter the granular surface of an outcrop, some is absorbed while some is scattered (Clark 1999). Bright grains (e.g., quartz) scatter most photons, while dark surfaces (e.g., coal) absorb the majority of photons. Theoretically, sandstones containing a high percentage of quartz should be more reflective than shale. For example, spectral data from NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory (Fig. 1) shows a large difference in the NIR reflectivity of quartz-rich sandstones and clay-rich shale (Baldridge et al. 2008). If a significant mineralogical difference exists in the composition of adjacent sandstone and shale in outcrop, these are most likely spectrally distinguishable, and this difference in nearinfrared reflectivity of sandstone and shale may be detectable using lidar intensity returns. The research presented here tests the hypothesis that lidar reflective intensity is influenced by lithology in clastic rocks by scanning both fresh

Two experiments were conducted to investigate the relationship between intensity and lithology. Both experiments were conducted using the Bureau of Economic Geologys Optech Ilris 3D laser scanner. This unit uses a 1500 nm (eye-safe) wavelength laser, with a range of 800 m (, 2,625 ft) for target with 20% reflectivity (Optech 2009). Optech (2009) reports a raw range accuracy of 7 mm (0.28 in) at 100 m (, 330 ft) for this unit. Raw intensities and ranges are collected in an equal-angle array. The laser beam divergence is 0.17 mrad, but the minimum spot spacing divergence is 0.02 mrad (Optech 2009). Scanning with point spacing near the spot size (calculated from beam divergence) decreases the time of acquisition while covering nearly the entire targeted surface. Scanning near the minimum spot spacing is often unnecessary (many repeat measurements), but improves the signal-to-noise ratio. Both physical and environmental conditions impact intensity values. The most important physical factors are distance and target reflectivity, with angle of incidence and roughness being secondary. Environmental conditions such as humidity, dust, and variations in air density can also affect intensity. When lidar is acquired under favorable conditions (still air, low humidity), and after the geometric variables are corrected, intensity becomes proportional to reflectivity (Lutz et al. 2003; Ahokas et al. 2006; Hofle and Pfeifer 2007; Pfeifer et al. 2007). An extensive treatment of lidar correction theory and methods can be found in the remote-sensing literature (Song et al. 2002; Luzum et al. 2004; Ahokas et al. 2006; Coren and Sterazi 2006; Mazzarini et al. 2006; Hofle and Pfeifer 2007; Pfeifer et al. 2007; Pfeifer et al 2008). In agreement with Pfeifer et al. (2007), it was observed that the Optech ILRIS intensity data does not follow simple physical principles. However, when raw intensities vary systematically with distance, data-driven normalizations can be developed that achieve intensities which approximate reflectivity (Hofle and Pfiefer 2007).

342

D. BURTON ET AL.

JSR

FIG. 4.Logged stratigraphy, gamma-ray log, and intensity log from experiment 1.

JSR

LIDAR INTENSITY AND ROCK PROPERTIES

343

For experiment two, five scans were taken along an outcrop on the Sagavanirktok River from a distance of approximately 300 m (, 985 ft). Raw intensities from these data show a strong fade with distance (Fig. 2). Normalization using the scanner software also shows a fade with distance across the outcrop, but possibly more telling is the large amount of variability introduced by the scanner correction (Fig. 2). As a result, a data-driven statistical normalization was used (Reyes et al. 2009). Histograms of intensities were generated for each distance bin (every meter). If enough data points were available, the histograms could be represented by a Gaussian distribution. This Gaussian approximation was used to obtain a median for each bin. This median was subtracted from 100 (approximate median for all data), and this value was used as a multiplier to shift intensity histograms to a normalized value. The raw data were reread to shift the median output value for each bin. A similar multiplier was calculated and used to shift the maximum and minimum value for each bin. Statistically normalized intensities show very little fade with distance, median values are very consistent, and variability is much lower than scanner normalized intensities (Fig. 2).
EXPERIMENT 1

Lidar cans of the Sego Canyon 2 core were visualized in Polyworks, and a strip of points 10 cm (, 4 in.) wide was extracted from each core segment (Fig. 3). Data points were adjusted to the proper depth as marked on the core boxes. Normalized intensity data from the core scans were combined to make a lidar intensity log. Quantitative mineralogy from X-ray diffraction and core descriptions were used to provide lithologic and mineralogical information for comparison to lidar intensity. In addition, intensity was compared to the log suite from the Sego Canyon 2 well. Results Quantitative analysis through experimentation shows that lithology is a primary control on intensity returns after distance normalization. The intensity data show that sandstones are more reflective than mudstones (Fig. 3). Figure 4 includes intensity and gamma ray log for the Sego Canyon 2 well and the corresponding stratigraphy for the Sego Sandstone. Intensity lows correspond to shale-rich interval and to gamma-ray highs, while intensity highs coincide with sandstones and low gamma-ray values. Differences between the gamma-ray and lidar logs can be partially explained by the difference in resolution between the two tools. Lidar has a higher resolution than gamma-ray logs, and is more sensitive to lithologic variation. From this experiment it is clear that lidar intensity is related to lithology. Mineralogy from core plugs (Wendlandt and Bhuyan 1990) was also compared to intensity in the Sego Canyon 2 well core. The plots in Figure 5 show the correlation between intensity and shale (clay) and proxies for sandstone (combined quartz, plagioclase, and K-spar) in weight percent. Intensity exhibits a log-linear relationship to both weight percent clay (R2 5 .6981 and p value % 0.01) and weight percent of combined quartz, k-spar, and plagioclase, a proxy for percent sand (R2 5 .7729 and p-value % .01). This regression analysis shows that much of variation in corrected intensity in the Sego Canyon 2 core can be explained by the difference in mineralogical composition between sandstone and shale.
EXPERIMENT 2

FIG. 5.Mineralogy A) wt. % clay and B) wt % combined quartz, plagioclase, and K-feldspar (from Wendlandt and Bhuyan, 1990) compared with lidar intensity of the Sego Canyon 2 core.

For both experiments one and two, distance-normalized intensities were used. In the first experiment, subsurface core from behind-theoutcrop was scanned. The core used in this study is from the Exxon Production Research Sego Canyon 2 well in eastern Utah. Boxes of core were set up at , 60 meters (, 200 ft.) from the lidar unit at an angle of 4540u from perpendicular to the path of the laser. At this distance the laser spot covered an area of about 1.5 square-centimeters (, 0.6 in2) and overlapping points were acquired every 5 millimeters (, 0.2 in). Distance to the target and angle of incidence stayed roughly the same throughout the experiment. Because there was no appreciable change in geometry between the scanner and targets, the Optech scanner software correction was considered adequate. Using this method for correction, intensity returns remained consistent from one scan to the next.

The results of experiment two are in strong agreement with experiment one, and suggest intensity as an effective remote sensor of lithology. The Prince Creek Formation at Sagwon Bluffs, located along the Sagavanirktok River on the North Slope of Alaska, consists of fine- to coarsegrained sandstone, siltstone, mudstone, carbonaceous shale, and coal.

344

D. BURTON ET AL.

JSR

FIG. 6.Intensity image (0255) of the Prince Creek Formation, with bright sandstones, darker shales, and very dark coals. The data used for the intensity log (Fig. 7) is marked by a blue line, and the red circles are the data points within the image that were included in the statistical analysis. Snow banks, water, and saturated rocks are seen to return low intensities in the ravines.

Depositional environments include meandering rivers, levees, crevasse splays, lakes, swamps, and soil-forming environments (Flaig and van der Kolk 2009). Palynomorph biostratigraphy indicates that the entire succession is early Paleocene in age (Frederiksen et al. 1996; Mull et al. 2003). Distance-normalized scans from the Prince Creek Formation were merged and interpreted in Polyworks. For qualitative analysis, a 5 cm (2 in.) strip of intensities was extracted from a section of clean outcrop and compared to a lithologic measured section. Data points were collected in 10 cm (3.9 in.) radius circles on a regular grid, with minor variation to include thinner units (Fig. 6). Intensities were binned by lithology (interpreted using photos, measured sections, and lidar spatial and spectral data) for quantitative statistical analysis. Results Qualitatively, there is a general relationship between intensity and lithology (Fig. 7). The intensity image shows clearly distinguishable units of sandstone, mudstone, and coal (Fig. 6). Weathered, wet, and covered outcrops were avoided. A t test was performed to asses weather the means for the population of sandstone and shale were statistically different from each other. The t test results show that the intensity population for sandstone is significantly higher than the intensity population for mudstone, t(11398) 5 127.06, p % 0.001. A histogram of all data points collected from unweathered outcrop shows a distinct trimodal distribution (Fig. 8). Each mode related to the median of each lithologic intensity

population. Thus, coals are less reflective than either sandstones or mudstones. Experiment two visual and statistical analysis confirms the hypothesis that sandstones and mudstones (and also coal) can be distinguished using lidar intensity data.
WEATHERING AND MOISTURE

An important difference between experiments one and two is the analysis of unweathered core in experiment one verses naturally weathered outcrop in experiment two. During the course of this study, intensity images from many settings were viewed, and it became obvious that weathering had a significant impact on intensity returns. Typically, weathering of sandstones (e.g., desert varnish) decreases intensity returns. Additionally, Fe oxides along fractures have higher-intensity returns than surrounding shale. Weathered mudstone beds are commonly recessed relative to the surrounding sandstone. As a result these thin beds might not be contacted by the lidar-emitted laser, and therefore, are not identifiable in the intensity image. Although the effects of weathering are not quantitatively assessed, weathering did influence intensity returns of outcrop surfaces. Surface coverings such as dust, mud cake, and lichen also act to diminish returns. Lidar intensity can be used to discriminate lithology only from relatively clean, unweathered outcrop surfaces. As a result, lithology can most easily be discerned from intensity returns in areas where physical weathering dominates (e.g., alpine and tundra settings).

JSR

LIDAR INTENSITY AND ROCK PROPERTIES

APPLICATION

345

The results of this study highlight the applicability of lidar to quantitative stratigraphic studies in clastic outcrops. As shown by this research, quantitative estimates of weight percent sandstone or shale in outcrop can be made from calibrated intensity images. Lidar is especially useful in studies of inaccessible outcrop exposures. Intensity data could also be employed in aerial lidar surveys to map clastic stratigraphy and quantify geometries on a regional scale (e.g., Cretaceous and Paleocene outcrops in northern Alaska). A useful application of the relationship between intensity and lithology is the production pseudo-gamma ray logs from lidar data (Fig. 9). The best-fit regression (a power function) is shown in the graph in Figure 9 relating intensity (x) to gamma-ray (y) values for the Sego Canyon 2 well. The pseudo-gamma ray log in Figure 9 was generated from the regression equation, and is very similar to the actual down-hole gamma ray log (Fig. 4). This method of simulating gamma ray signatures of clastic reservoir analogs is faster, and spatially more accurate, than traditional methods using a hand-held gamma-ray spectrometer. The application of intensity as a remote sensor of rock properties is not limited to sand, clay, and shale. Other studies have shown its applicability in distinguishing between clay-rich and carbonate-rich lithologies (Franceschi et al. 2009) and differentiation of sand from gravel (Klise et al. 2009). We have observed a correlation between rock properties and lithology in a number of settings. For example, in the tar sands of Alberta, Canada, bitumen saturation diminishes intensity returns, and bitumen-stained sand can be distinguished from unsaturated sand and silt. In the Tocito Sandstone of New Mexico, sandstones rich in glauconite return less of the emitted signal than adjacent sandstones without glauconite. In the future, lidar intensity will likely be used as a proxy for a variety of rock properties (for example lithology, bitumen saturation, and sandstone composition). Any such applications will at a minimum need adjustment for distance fade, and calibration to quantitative sampling to be valid.
CONCLUSIONS

FIG. 7.Lithology log (from measured section) and lidar intensity log of the Prince Creek Formation.

In addition to weathering, moisture also impacts intensity. At the wavelength used in these experiments, water is a strong absorber (Long et al. 2006; Franceschi et al. 2009). In lidar scans from the North Slope of Alaska (Fig. 6) the impact of water and ice on intensity is clear. Watersaturated rock and soil in ravines exhibit lower intensities than the surrounding outcrop, and no returns were received from the snow patches on the upper hill slope. Marked intensity lows and unusable intensities have also been observed in scanned seacliffs (personal observation). Because of the negative effects of moisture on intensity returns, lidar discrimination of lithology is not effective in wet conditions (e.g., high humidity or rainy conditions).

Lidar is used in many disciplines as a remote-sensing tool to quickly acquire spatial and spectral data. Although lidar has become a popular tool for outcrop investigation, studies have largely ignored the spectral capabilities of intensity returns from lidar surveys. Experimental scans on the Sego Canyon 2 well show a correlation between lidar intensity, weight percent clay, and weight percent combined quartz, K-spar, and plagioclase. Similarly, lidar intensity is sensitive to lithology in clastic outcrops that are lightly unweathered and dry. Our study shows that lidar can provide a number of new geologic remote-sensing applications in clastic outcrops. Intensity data can be used to discriminate between different lithologies and simulate gamma-ray logs, as well as to quantify stratigraphy. Our findings are particularly applicable to inaccessible outcrops and regional belts.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research is made possible by the generosity of the members of the Quantitative Clastic Laboratory Industrial Associates program, which includes Anadarko, BHP Billiton, BG Group, Cairn, ExxonMobil, Marathon, Resold YPF, Shell, Statoil, and Woodside. Programming and signal processing was done by Reuben Reyes. Much thanks to the reviewers, Lynn Soregan, R.R. Jones, and Tim Wawrzyniec, and to editor John Southard. Their edits and suggestions greatly improved the quality of this paper.

346

D. BURTON ET AL.

JSR

FIG. 8.Histogram of normalized intensities from the Prince Creek Formation. Each lithology has a unique intensity distribution.

FIG. 9.A pseudo gamma-ray log of the Sego Sandstone in the Sego Canyon 2 well generated from lidar intensity returns, and a cross plot of intensity and gamma ray values.

REFERENCES

AHLGREN, S., AND HOLMLUND, J., 2003, Using 3-D outcrop laser scans for fracture analysis: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Search and Discovery. article 40099. AHOKAS, E., KAASALAINEN, S., HYYPPA, J., AND SUOMALAINEN, J., 2006, Calibration of the Optech AlTM 3100 laser scanner intensity data using brightness targets: Commission I Symposium, International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, v. 36, p. 110117. ANTONARAKIS, A.S., RICHARDS, K.S., AND BRASINGTON, J., 2008, Object-based land cover classification using airborne LiDAR: Remote Sensing of Environment, v. 112, p. 29882998.

BALDRIDGE, A.M., HOOK, S.J., GROVE, C.I., AND RIVERA, G., 2008, The ASTER spectral library version 2.0: Remote Sensing of Environment, v. 113, p. 711715. BELLIAN, J.A., KERANS, C., AND JENNETTE, D.C., 2005, Digital outcrop models: applications of terrestrial scanning lidar technology in stratigraphic modeling: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 75, p. 166176. BONNAFFE, F., JENNETTE, D., AND ANDREWS, J., 2007, A method for acquiring and processing ground-based lidar data in difficult-to-access outcrops for use in threedimensional, virtual-reality models: Geosphere, v. 3, p. 501510. BOWITZ, J., AND EHLING, A., 2008, Non-destructive infrared analyses: a method for provenance analyses of sandstones: Environmental Geology, v. 5634, p. 451802. BRENNAN, R., AND WEBSTER, T.L., 2006, Object-oriented land cover classification of lidar derived surfaces: Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing, v. 32, p. 162172.

JSR

LIDAR INTENSITY AND ROCK PROPERTIES

347

BUCKLEY, S.J., HOWELL, J.A., ENGE, H.D., AND KURZ, T.H., 2008, Terrestrial laser scanning in geology; data acquisition, processing and accuracy considerations: The Geological Society of London, Journal, v. 165, p. 625638. CHUST, G., GALPARSORO, I., BORJA, A., FRANCO, J., AND URIARTE, A., 2008, Coastal and estuarine habitat mapping, using LIDAR height and intensity and multi-spectral imagery: Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, v. 78, p. 633643. CLARK, R.N., AND ROUSH, T.L., 1984, Reflectance spectroscopy: quantitative analysis techniques for remote sensing applications: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 89, p. 63296340. CLARK, R.N., 1999, Chapter 1: Spectroscopy of rocks and minerals, and principles of spectroscopy, in Rencz, A.N., ed., Manual of Remote Sensing, Remote sensing for the Earth Sciences: New York, John Wiley and Sons, v. 3, p. 358. COREN, F., AND STERZAI, P., 2006, Radiometric correction in laser scanning: International Journal of Remote Sensing, v. 27, p. 30973104. COREN, F., VISINTINT, D., PREARO, G., AND STERAZI, P., 2005, Integrating LIDAR intensity measures and hyprespectral data for extracting of cultural heritage, in Proceedings of ItalyCanada 2005 Workshop on 3D Digital imaging and Modeling: Applications of Heritage, Industry, Medicine and Land, Padova, Italy. DONOGHUE, D.N.M., WATT, P.J., COX, N.J., AND WILSON, J., 2007, Remote sensing of species mixtures in conifer plantations using LiDAR height and intensity data: Remote Sensing of Environment, v. 110, p. 509522. ENGE, H.D., BUCKLEY, S.J., ROTEVATN, A., AND HOWELL, J.A., 2007, From outcrop to reservoir simulation model; workflow and procedures: Geosphere, v. 3, p. 469490. FLAIG, P.P., AND VAN DER KOLK, D.A., 2009, Depositional environments of the Prince Creek Formation along the East side of the Toolik River: Sagavanirktok Quadrangle, North Slope, Alaska, in Wartes, M.A., and Decker, P.L., eds., Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, Preliminary Interpretive Report 2009-1, Preliminary Results of Field Investigations in the Brooks Range Foothills and North Slope, Alaska, p. 520. FRANCHESCHI, M., TEZA, G., PRETO, N., PESCI, A., GALGARO, A., AND GIRARDI, S., 2009, Discrimination between marls and limestones using intensity data from terrestrial laser scanner: Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. doi:10.1016/ j.isprsjprs.2009.03.003. FREDERIKSEN, N.O., SHEEHAN, T.P., AGER, T.A., COLLETT, T.S., FOUCH, T.D., FRANCZYK, K.J., AND JOHNSSON, M., 1996, Palynomorph biostratigraphy of Upper Cretaceous to Eocene samples from the Sagavanirktok Formation in its type region, North Slope of Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 96-84, 44 p. HASEGAWA, H., 2006, Evaluation of LIDAR reflectance amplitude towards land cover conditions: Bulletin of the Geographical Survey Institute, v. 53, p. 4350. HOFLE, B., AND PFEIFER, N., 2007, Correction of laser scanning intensity data: data and model-driven approaches: Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, v. 62, p. 415433. JANSON, X., KERANS, C., BELLIAN, J.A., AND FITCHEN, W., 2007, Three-dimensional geological and synthetic seismic model of Early Permian redeposited basinal carbonate deposits, Victorio Canyon, west Texas: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 91, p. 14051436. JONES, R.R., MCCAFFREY, KENNETH, J.W., IMBER, J., WIGHTMAN, R., SMITH, S.A.F., HOLDSWORTH, R.E., CLEGG, P., PAOLA, N., HEALY, D., AND WILSON, R.W., 2008, Calibration and validation of reservoir models: the importance of high-resolution, quantitative outcrop analogues: Geological Society, London, Special Publication, v. 309, p. 8798. JONES, R.R., MCCAFFREY, K.J.W., CLEGG, P., WILSON, R.W., HOLLIMAN, N.S., HOLDSWORTH, R.E., IMBER, J., AND WAGGOTT, S., 2009, Integration of regional to outcrop digital data: 3D visualisation of multi-scale geological models: Computers & Geosciences, v. 35, p. 418. KAASALAINEN, S., KUKKO, A., LINDROOS, T., LITKEY, P., KAARTINEN, H., HYYPPA, J., AND AHOKAS, E., 2008, Brightness measurements and calibration with airborne and terrestrial laser scanners: Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, v. 46, p. 528534. KLISE, K.A., WEISSMANN, G.S., MCKENNA, S.A., NICHOLS, E.M., FRECHETTE, J.D., WAWRZYNIEC, T.F., AND TIDWELL, V.C., 2009, Exploring solute transport and streamline connectivity using lidar-based outcrop images and geostatistical representations of heterogeneity, Water Resources Research, v. 45, W05413, doi:10.1029/ 2008WR007500. KUKKO, A., KAASALAINEN, S., AND LITKEY, P., 2008, Effect of incidence angle on laser scanner intensity and surface data: Applied Optics, v. 47, p. 986992. LABOURDETTE, R., AND JONES, R.R., 2007, Characterization of fluvial architectural elements using a three-dimensional outcrop data set: Escanilla braided system, southcentral Pyrenees, Spain: Geosphere, v. 3, p. 422434. LEE, K., TOMASSO, M., AMBROSE, W.A., AND BOUROULLEC, R., 2007, Integration of GPR with stratigraphic and lidar data to investigate behind-the-outcrop 3D geometry of a tidal channel reservoir analog, upper Ferron Sandstone, Utah: The Leading Edge, v. 26, p. 994998.

LONG, B., XHARDE, R., BOUCHER, M., AND FORBES, D., 2006, Significance of LiDAR return signal intensities in coastal zone mapping applications, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, p. 24242427. LUTZ, E., GEIST, T., AND STOTTER, J., 2003. Investigations of airborne laser scanning signal intensity of glacial surfaces utilizing comprehensive laser geometry modeling and orthophoto surface modeling (a case study: Svartsheibreen, Norway): International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote, Sensing Workshop on 3-D reconstruction from airborne laser scanner and InSAR data, Dresden, Germany. LUZUM, B.J., SLATTON, K.C., AND SHRESTHA, R.L., 2004, Identification and analysis of airborne laser swath mapping data in a novel feature space: Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, IEEE, v. 1, p. 268271. MAZZARINI, F., PARESCHI, M.T., FAVALLI, M., ISOLA, I., TARQUINI, S., AND BOSCHI, E., 2006, Lava flow identification and ageing by means of LiDAR intensity: the Mt. Etna case: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 112, p. B02201, doi:10.1029/2005JB004166. MCCAFFREY, K.J.W., JONES, R.R., HOLDSWORTH, R.E., WILSON, R.W., CLEGG, P., IMBER, J., HOLLIMAN, N., AND TRINKS, I., 2005, Unlocking the spatial dimension: digital technologies and the future of geoscience fieldwork: Geological Society of London, Journal, v. 162, p. 927938. MULL, C.G., HOUSEKNECHT, D.W., AND BIRD, K.J., 2003, Revised Cretaceous and Tertiary stratigraphic nomenclature in the Colville Basin, northern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 1673, p. 151. OLARIU, M.I., FERGUSON, J.F., AIKEN, C.L.V., AND XU, X., 2008, Outcrop fracture characterization using terrestrial laser scanners: Deep-water Jackfork sandstone at Big Rock Quarry, Arkansas: Geosphere, v. 4, p. 247259. OPTECH, 2009, Laser Scanner ILRIS 3D technical data: http://www.optech.ca/ i3dtechoverview-ilris.htm (accessed on 25/10/2009). PESCI, A., TEZA, G., AND VENTURA, G., 2008, Remote sensing of volcanic terrains by terrestrial laser scanner: preliminary reflectance and RGB implications for studying Vesuvius crater (Italy): Annals of Geophysics, v. 51, p. 633653. PFEIFER, N., DORINGER, P., HARING, A., AND FAN, H., 2007, Investigating terrestrial laser scanning intensity data: quality and function relations: Urban Remote Sensing, Joint Event, Paris, p. 19. PFEIFER, N., HOFLE, B., BRIESE, C., RUTZINGER, M., AND HARING, A., 2008, Analysis of the backscattered energy in terrestrial laser scanning data: International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, v. 37, p. 10451051. PRANTER, M.J., ELLISON, A.I., COLE, R.D., AND PATTERSON, P.E., 2007, Analysis and modeling of intermediate-scale reservoir heterogeneity based on a fluvial point-bar outcrop analog, Williams Fork Formation, Piceance Basin, Colorado: American Association of Petroleum Geologist, Bulletin, v. 91, p. 10251051. PRINGLE, J.K., WESTERMAN, A.R., CLARK, J.D., DRINKWATER, N.J., AND GARDINER, A.R., 2004, 3D high-resolution digital models of outcrop analogue study sites to constrain reservoir model uncertainty: an example from Alport Castles, Derbyshire, UK: Petroleum Geoscience, v. 10, p. 343352. PRINGLE, J.K., HOWELL, J.A., HODGETTS, D., WESTERMAN, A.R., AND HODGSON, D.M., 2006, Virtual outcrop models of petroleum analogues: a review of the current state-ofthe art: First Break, v. 24, p. 3341. REYES, R., BELLIAN, J.A., AND ADAMS, E.W., 2009, Using statistical methods to correct lidar intensities from geological outcrops, in Digital Mapping ASPRS/ MAPPS 2009, Specialty Conference, CD-ROM, San Antonio, Texas; November 1619. ROTEVATN, A., BUCKLEY, S.J., HOWELL, J.A., AND FOSSEN, H., 2009, Overlapping faults and their effect on fluid flow in different reservoir types: A LIDAR-based outcrop modeling and flow simulation study: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 93, p. 407427. SONG, J., HAN, S., YU, K., AND KIM, Y., 2002, Assessing the possibility of land-cover classification using lidar intensity data: International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, v. 34, Part 3B, p. 259262. STAREK, M., LUZUM, B., KUMAR, R., AND SLATTON, K.C., 2006. Normalizing Lidar Intensities, University of Florida, Geosensing Engineering and Mapping Center, Report no. Rep_2006-12-001. TRINKS, I., CLEGG, P., MCCAFFREY, K., JONES, R., HOBBS, R., HOLDSWORTH, B., HOLLIMAN, N., IMBER, J., WAGGOTT, S., AND WILSON, R., 2005, Mapping and analysing virtual outcrops: Visual Geosciences, v. 10, p. 1319. WAWRZYNIEC, T.F., MCFADDEN, L.D., ELLWEIN, A., MEYER, G., SCUDERI, L., MCAULIFFE, J., AND FAWCETT, P., 2007, Chronotopographic analysis directly from point-cloud data: a method for detecting small, seasonal hillslope change, Black Mesa Escarpment, NE Arizona: Geosphere, v. 3, p. 550567. WENDLANDT, R.F., AND BHUYAN, K., 1990, Estimation of mineralogy and lithology from geochemical log measurements: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 74, p. 837856. WHITE, P.D., AND JONES, R.R., 2008, A cost-efficient solution to true color terrestrial laser scanning: Geosphere, v. 4, p. 564575. Received 6 April 2010; accepted 2 December 2010.