my prompt and GROK's response:
I'm seeing online art showing plains warriors' horses painted with large areas of red -- rumps and chests, sometimes legs – with white or yellow designs on top. I may emulate that with my miniatures because it looks cool, but it does seem extravagant. Was red paint plentiful enough to use on such a large area? Did tribes make their own paint, or was that a trade item? You can address other colors of paint as well. What I am really after is what sorts of practical limitations existed for a warrior who wanted to paint himself and/or his horse using a good bit of red or another color of paint?
Red paint was plentiful enough for large areas on horses (and warriors), and Plains tribes routinely did exactly what you're seeing in the art—broad swaths of red on rumps, chests, shoulders, or legs, often overlaid with contrasting white/yellow symbols or handprints. It wasn't extravagant or rare; the primary red pigment came from abundant local sources that warriors (or their families/medicine people) could gather or prepare themselves. Trade items like vermilion added brighter accents when available, but weren't required for the bold looks in period art or ledger drawings.
Sources and making of the paint
Plains tribes (Lakota, Cheyenne, Pawnee, Crow, Comanche, etc., in the 18th–19th centuries) made most of their own paint from readily available natural materials—no factories or long supply chains needed for the basics.
• Red (the star of your question): Almost always red ochre—a clay-rich iron oxide (hematite) dug from widespread mineral deposits across the Plains and West (some sites mined for over 10,000 years). It was earthy, durable, and produced the classic deep red you see. Tribes also extracted red from plants/roots (berries, beets, buffalo berries, cactus fruit, pussy willow buds). Yellow ochre could be heated to turn red. This was cheap, local, and storable as dried powder in deerskin pouches.
• Brighter/trade red (vermilion): A vivid mercury-sulfide pigment imported from China/Europe and sold by fur traders. It was a huge hit—Indians traded "a heap of furs" for tiny amounts because it was far brighter than native ochre. Vermilion supplemented rather than replaced ochre; it was often used for faces, fine details, or when they wanted extra pop. By the Remington era (post-1850s), it was common in trade but still a luxury item compared to free local ochre.
Other colors (all made similarly—grind the pigment, mix fresh):
• White: Gypsum, white clay, limestone, crushed eggshells or seashells.
• Yellow: Yellow ochre, flowers/plants/moss, or buffalo gallstones (a Plains specialty).
• Black: Charcoal (from fires) mixed with grease.
• Blue/Green/Purple: Clays, duck manure (for blue), moss/algae/berries/copper ore, or plant dyes—less common for big horse areas but used in symbols.
Binders (to make powder stick and waterproof a bit): Animal fat/tallow, bear grease, egg yolk, blood, spit, or urine—whatever was handy. Fat-based mixes gave a slight sheen and helped it last through dust/sweat. Paint was often prepared right before use but could be stored dry.
Practical limitations for a warrior wanting lots of red (or any color)
There were limits, but material scarcity wasn't one of them for red ochre—it was dirt you could dig up. Here's what actually constrained things:
• Quantity/availability: Ochre was essentially free and plentiful. A warrior could gather or trade for enough to cover a horse's rump, chest, and legs plus his own body. Vermilion was the only "expensive" red; it might be reserved for highlights or high-status warriors because of the fur-trade cost. No one was running out of red ochre mid-campaign.
• Time and ritual: Painting wasn't a quick spray job—it was a sacred act (like a prayer for power and protection). A warrior or medicine man applied it with intention, choosing symbols (handprint = vengeance; lightning zigzags = speed; eye circles = sharper senses; etc.). This took real effort and focus—maybe 30–90+ minutes per horse plus self-paint. It happened in camp before battle, a hunt, or a raid, not on the trail. You wouldn't casually repaint every day.
• Durability and logistics: Fat-based paint held up for a short fight or hunt but faded with rain, sweat, dust, or long rides. On extended campaigns, it might need touch-ups. Carrying extra powder was easy (small pouches), but mixing/applying took calm time and a cooperative horse. Horses weren't painted daily—only for important occasions—so it wasn't a huge ongoing burden.
• Labor and status: Gathering/preparing paint was straightforward, but the full ritual (plus matching symbols on rider and horse) showed skill and spiritual readiness. Prominent warriors or those with good horse medicine did the most elaborate versions. Poorer or hurried raiders might use simpler or smaller designs.
• Cultural/spiritual side: Paint wasn't just "decoration"—red meant blood, war, strength, life force. Slapping on huge red areas invoked that power. It was meaningful, not wasteful.
In short: No, it wasn't extravagant in a resource sense. The art you're seeing (and Remington-era depictions) reflects real practice—bold, large red zones were common because the pigment was cheap and the symbolism potent. Modern illustrations sometimes amp up the saturation or perfect edges for drama, but the core look is grounded in history.
For your miniatures, go for it—large red areas with white/yellow designs will look fantastic and historically plausible (use an earthy, muted red ochre tone rather than candy-apple for extra accuracy if you want). It captures the "cool" warrior aesthetic without straying into fantasy. If you're matching a specific tribe or era, ochre reds were the everyday workhorse; vermilion reds were the flashy upgrades.
