Hi Roger. An afterthought or three, expanding on Chris's idea, either of which might be doable.

1) Take a swarm, say San Simeon and its aftershock sequence, and measure the distance of the 3D "box" containing most of the aftershocks, let's say 30K X 30K x with x being twice the hypocentric depth). Then you make one of two decisions: 1) place the hypocenter smack in the middle of the box and take four temporal views of the earthquake and its aftershocks. (You could get really fancy and do six, as it is a cube, but I see no advantage to this extra exercise.)

Or, if you prefer, place your "camera" somewhere on the square's (or cube's) perimeter at the depth of the hypocenter and take four (or six) temporal views from the edge toward the center, (resulting in four to six rectangular temporal views, each 15K in depth from hypocenter to edge. This is just looking at the same data but from a different vantage point.

OR...

3) You could get really fancy and make the hypocenter of the main shock your point of reference (with a 15K depth of view) as you looked at panoramic segments of the aftershock area as a camera might pan through them in a 360 degree rotation. (You would want to limit your viewing area to a rectangular box rather than a cube, as the extra two views might be confusing and of no practical worth. Although all the earthquakes are popping up and fading away at different rates of speed and in different locations and sizes, this might actually be the most interesting and entertaining of the three approaches.

I hope this is clearer to you than it is to me. :-)

Have fun!

Cathryn