Hi Mark - try Reflect on the entire object, just place the plane in the right place - that is, don’t delete half first. How does that work?
-Pascal
Hi Pascal,
I believe that is actually worse. It introduces unwanted faces where points don’t lie on the symmetry axis. See screenshot below. It’s a similar model as above recreated with Rhino SubD tools. I moved a point deliberately away from the symmetry plane and it introduced a new face down the centerline.
For me it would be more intuitive to mirror and fix gaps if any exist. Either by running setpt first or welding disconnected points after running the refelect command.
@BrianJ, thanks for the update Brian, looking forward to the added tolerance option.
On a related note, symmetry is currently not persistent with the reflect command. I’m not sure if this is a possibility, but would it be possible to have reflect be persistent if it was a history enabled command?
I can’t say if there will be a tolerance option but it’s filed for @lowell who’s working on Reflect to look into. I also immediately asked for history support on Reflect and that was filed as https://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-55845 . My understanding is that it is not easy as the method used is removing the original SubD so we’ll need to come up with another way. Note that you can run Reflect again and press enter to reuse the reflection plane and picked side to make it faster.
OK, I’ll keep my fingers crossed for that one 
With regards to the history, I wasn’t sure how it worked or if it would be possible, but I appreciate you looking into it. It’s already an improvement from where we were last week, I had to delete one side, mirror one half and then weld the seams, which took quite a bit longer than using the reflect command.
I’ll play around some more later this week time permitting. Cheers.
Agree. If this is going to be done with command options, there should probably be options for:
-weld tolerance (default = document)
-fill holes adjacent to mirror plane (default = no)
Also, I’ll say it again: a grasshopper JoinSubD component would be so much more versatile. Combined with mirroring we could do radial symmetry, 3d symmetry using regular polyhedra, multiple arbitrary lines of symmetry, and stack symmetry on symmetry.
2 Likes
Not sure if this will help at all but it’s a way to Join SubD in GH currently. Subd-Symmetry-2.gh (10.8 KB)
I filed your GH JoinSubD component request as https://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-56111 too. Thanks.
5 Likes
Thanks for the definition. I’d had limited success attempting workarounds. Eager to play with this!
HI , I have just downloaded the latest RH7 WIP
the reflect command on sub D toolbar doesnt seem to be working anymore
would you please tell me how can i downgrade to previous WIP version ?
thanks
Appo
Hi - what happens when you type the command?
-wim
Hi Wim
please let me apologize , it seems to be working now.
thanks.
Appo
_Reflect with history
Any news?
What appeared symmetry is a big step forward. Thank you McNeel team!
Having a little tested symmetry, I would like to make a few wishes.
At first
I would like to remove the hierarchical dependence on the parent to the children only. But create mutual dependence for both sides. I would like to edit the child side so that the parent side changes at the same time.
Second
I propose to some freeze the axis of symmetry so that the points on this axis could not be shifted to either side to the right or left relative to the axis. Since shifting to the side breaks the topology, additional faces appear or existing ones are deleted.
It is necessary to allow the movement of points only along the line of the axis of symmetry.
Third
If apply the InsertPoint command, then the hierarchical dependence ceases - this is also as noted earlier with the Bridge command
Thanks for the feedback…
I added your vote here https://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-57206
Can you provide a model to show the issue you’re trying to solve with this one?
Thanks, filed this as https://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-57215
Hi Brian
If the points of mother side are moved to the left outside the axis , then the topology breaks
Reflect.
The same actions but in the T-Splines.
First, both sides are interdependent.
Secondly, the topology does not break (The axis of symmetry is partially frozen)
Third, another positive is that the geometry on the opposite side is changing in real time.
TS Symmetry
1 Like
I think to make the interdependence of mother and child need a fake points\edges\faces selection of the child. We select a point on the side of the child, but in fact it is a hoax. In fact, we selected parent and all the manipulations occur with the parent but in a mirrorred and it seems to us that there is interdependence of both sides
Just a thought, just an idea.
ps
It even became interesting how this was implemented in the TS