3 ms·

This is completely ignoring the fact that for a long time, purple/violet dyes were really rare and expensive. "Royal purple" was called that because only royalt

• varjag 5y ago
  This fact is completely addressed in the article, pointing out that aquamarine and other colors were expensive as well yet it never stopped the artists.
  • bsder 5y ago
    Tyrian purple was way more expensive than ultramarine. It required vast numbers of snails for very small amounts of dye. When royalty couldn't afford it, the production method was lost very quickly. In addition, I'm pretty sure it didn't have a stable solid form. It also wasn't a particularly stable color (Tyrian purple robes would change color over time). Both of those, by themselves, would be enough to preclude its use by artists. The cost was just adding insult to injury.
    • varjag 5y ago
      Eh, it's not like kings would use it to paint themselves. Can't see what would prevent it using for commissioned work, a bulk of the art in the old days. Gold plating your artwork isn't cheap either but was used liberally none the less.
      • bsder 5y ago
        Gold is cheaper than ultramarine, and gold has a very stable solid form as does ultramarine (lapis lazuli). There also wasn't a lot of point in using the particular Tyrian purple in art as indigo blue and cochineal red were much more prevalent and worked fine as purple in art. The fact that Tyrian purple was lost is why Roman Catholic Cardinals wear red now instead of purple.