Hi K,
I suspect that you misunderstand both my statement and the purpose of my
post, which had no polemical intent,.
I am well aware of the distinction between areas and cells and the relevance
of these to the use of the SpecialCells method. As I indicated, I have
referred to this precise issue in numerous previous posts,
My response, which was primarily aimed at the OP, was intended to indicate
that the number of blank cells was not a limiting issue.
I was concerned that your use of the expression:
without any reference to areas or ranges might be interpreted as indicating
a limit to the number of blank cells.
This concern was not alleviated by your subsequent statement:
which, as it implicitly refers to 8192 blank cells, might, I felt, serve to
reinforce any misconception.
I therefore provided an example of a viable use of the SpecialCells method
in which the range of interest comprised over 16k blank cells. Obviously,
the example could readily be adapted to produce analogous results with much
higher numbers of blank cells. The question of the number of areas was not
an issue: indeed the only reference to areas and, implicitly, their
relevance, was in my post. It was, as I have indicated, this contextual
omission which prompted my response.