G
Greg Lovern
Is there a good way to size a cell to a picture?
Sizing the cell's height to the picture's height is no problem, and
moving the picture to the cell's location is no problem.
The problem is sizing the cell's width to the picture's width.
ColumnWidth is not in points, and the Range (or Column) object's Width
property, which is in points, is read-only.
The question has been asked before, but...
I tried entering a "0" in a cell and autofitting it, since ColumnWidth
is based on the width of a single "0" in the normal font. But when I
check the ColumnWidth property, it wasn't exactly 1 as expected.
Instead, it was 1.29. Two zeroes ("00") had a ColumnWidth of 2.29.
Is the addition of the 0.29 consistent, or does it depend on various
unpredictable factors?
Is there a better way of doing it than this:
1) Try changing the ColumnWidth property by increasingly larger
amounts until the minimum amount is found that actually changes the
width, because just trying to change it by 0.01 doesn't have any
effect. In a quick test just now, the minimum amount required to cause
any change was 0.08, which caused a change of 0.14, but obviously that
depends on the normal font and maybe other factors too.
2) Repeatedly change the ColumnWidth property by that minimum amount,
checking the resulting Width each time, until the desired Width is
reached.
Is there a better way?
Thanks,
Greg
Sizing the cell's height to the picture's height is no problem, and
moving the picture to the cell's location is no problem.
The problem is sizing the cell's width to the picture's width.
ColumnWidth is not in points, and the Range (or Column) object's Width
property, which is in points, is read-only.
The question has been asked before, but...
I tried entering a "0" in a cell and autofitting it, since ColumnWidth
is based on the width of a single "0" in the normal font. But when I
check the ColumnWidth property, it wasn't exactly 1 as expected.
Instead, it was 1.29. Two zeroes ("00") had a ColumnWidth of 2.29.
Is the addition of the 0.29 consistent, or does it depend on various
unpredictable factors?
Is there a better way of doing it than this:
1) Try changing the ColumnWidth property by increasingly larger
amounts until the minimum amount is found that actually changes the
width, because just trying to change it by 0.01 doesn't have any
effect. In a quick test just now, the minimum amount required to cause
any change was 0.08, which caused a change of 0.14, but obviously that
depends on the normal font and maybe other factors too.
2) Repeatedly change the ColumnWidth property by that minimum amount,
checking the resulting Width each time, until the desired Width is
reached.
Is there a better way?
Thanks,
Greg