27-05-2020, 10:14 AM
Gold cost more. True red cost more. Certain forms of blue also cost more. Ochre (shades of brown, brick, and yellow) were easier to obtain. I'm familiar with ochre but I don't know much about medieval green.
The green has been mixed with amber, brown and maybe sometimes blue. I don't know what the predominant pigment was for green in the Middle Ages, but it was probably more widely available than gold, red, and blue.
Gall ink (brown or blackish-brown) was readily available and I assume less costly than other pigments.
White was usually white lead, but I don't know how costly it was. There is very little white in the VMS (almost none) and the shades that usually are mixed with white are absent also.
It might be helpful to know which green pigments were predominant and what they cost compared to the others.
The green has been mixed with amber, brown and maybe sometimes blue. I don't know what the predominant pigment was for green in the Middle Ages, but it was probably more widely available than gold, red, and blue.
Gall ink (brown or blackish-brown) was readily available and I assume less costly than other pigments.
White was usually white lead, but I don't know how costly it was. There is very little white in the VMS (almost none) and the shades that usually are mixed with white are absent also.
It might be helpful to know which green pigments were predominant and what they cost compared to the others.