Why are RYB primary colors if human eyes have RGB cones?

Context

The human eye possesses three types of cone cells sensitive to red, green, and blue light. This RGB system forms the basis of many color technologies, such as televisions. However, traditional art instruction often uses red, yellow, and blue (RYB) as primary colors. This discrepancy raises the question of why the RYB system persists despite the biological reality of RGB vision. The historical development of color understanding and its representation in art and language also factors into the confusion.

Simple Answer

  • Our eyes see using red, green, and blue (RGB) cones.
  • TVs and computer screens use RGB because it's how our eyes work.
  • Painters traditionally used red, yellow, and blue (RYB) because those colors mix well with pigments.
  • Pigments are different than light; mixing them subtracts colors.
  • RYB is a historical system, while RGB is based on how our eyes work.

Detailed Answer

The discrepancy between the RGB system of the human eye and the RYB system used in traditional art stems from the fundamental difference between additive and subtractive color mixing. RGB, an additive color model, works with light. By combining red, green, and blue light in varying intensities, we can create a wide spectrum of colors. This is why our screens use RGB; it directly mimics the way our eyes perceive and process light. However, RYB, a subtractive color model, works with pigments. Pigments absorb certain wavelengths of light and reflect others, creating the colors we see. Mixing pigments is a subtractive process where the combination of colors results in the absorption of more wavelengths, hence creating darker shades.

Historically, the RYB color model predates the scientific understanding of light and color perception. Artists discovered through experimentation that red, yellow, and blue pigments, when mixed, could create a wide range of colors. This empirical knowledge formed the foundation of color theory in painting. The fact that RYB works well for subtractive mixing with pigments makes it useful in the world of art. However, this system doesn't accurately reflect the way our eyes perceive color. The different characteristics of pigments and their mixing behavior shaped the historical development of color theory in painting, separate from the biological mechanisms of color vision.

The evolution of color terminology in different languages also plays a role in the perceived disconnect. Many languages indeed show a hierarchical development in color terms, with basic color terms such as black and white appearing earlier, followed by red, then yellow and green/blue, and finally more nuanced shades. This linguistic evolution isn't directly related to the RGB color system but rather reflects the importance and prominence of certain colors in different cultures and their historical contexts. The way languages describe colors has evolved differently over time and across cultures and often doesn't reflect scientific understanding.

The discrepancy between RGB and RYB highlights the difference between scientific understanding and historical practice. While our eyes are biologically equipped with RGB cone cells, the RYB color model persists in art because of the practical way pigments mix. Understanding both systems is crucial. Scientists use RGB to accurately describe color perception and light phenomena, while artists often prefer RYB for mixing pigments. The persistent use of RYB is a testament to its practical utility in the artistic realm, even if it is not a direct reflection of human vision.

In summary, the difference between RGB and RYB arises from the different ways light and pigment interact. RGB is an additive color model that is accurate to how our eyes work and how light is produced by displays. RYB is a subtractive color model suited for mixing paint pigments which works through subtraction of light rather than addition. The historical development of art and language has influenced the adoption of RYB, even though it is not directly aligned with human visual perception. Therefore, both systems have their own practical applications and continue to be relevant in different fields.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ask Anything Wednesday: Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science - What are some intriguing questions about physics, astronomy, earth, and planetary science?

Context This is a weekly feature where people can ask any science-related question within the topics of physics, astronomy, earth and planetary science. The goal is to foster curiosity and knowledge sharing in these fields. Simple Answer What would happen if the Earth suddenly stopped spinning? How will the future of the universe look like? If all the rules of gravity were different, how would our world be? Why does the sky look blue during the day? How do stars form and what are their lifecycles? Detailed Answer The Ask Anything Wednesday feature provides a platform for individuals to delve into the fascinating realms of physics, astronomy, earth, and planetary science. It encourages open-ended inquiries, fostering a sense of curiosity and exploration. This platform aims to address questions that might be considered too speculative or unconventional for traditional science forums, making it a unique space for scientific exploration. One of the key aspects of Ask Anything Wednesday i...
Read more

How Accurate Are Radiometric Dating Methods? A Detailed Explanation

Context This question explores the reliability of radiometric dating techniques, specifically carbon dating and uranium-235 dating. The user seeks to understand the basis for assuming a consistent decay rate and whether dating methods could be inaccurate due to an unknown pattern of decay. The user also expresses skepticism about the reliability of these methods, particularly considering the long half-life of isotopes like uranium-235. Simple Answer Radiometric dating is like a clock, where the decay of radioactive elements acts as the timer. We know the rate of decay is constant because it has been consistently observed and tested in numerous lab experiments. Scientists have compared the decay rates of different elements to confirm the accuracy of the method. We can also use other dating methods like tree ring dating to corroborate the results of radiometric dating. While there are uncertainties, these methods are widely accepted and have been tested and refined over time. These metho...
Read more

Organ Transplant vs Plasma Donation: Perfect Match Probability

Context This question explores the likelihood of a perfect immunological match in organ transplantation compared to plasma donation. While plasma donation has a larger pool of donors and involves a less complex immunological matching process, organ transplantation requires a much closer match due to the nature of the transplanted tissue. The question delves into the similarities and differences in the immune system's response to both scenarios and whether a theoretically perfect match, eliminating the need for anti-rejection drugs, is possible in organ transplantation. Simple Answer Plasma donation is simpler, like giving a blood type that is easy to match. Organ donation needs a much closer match, like finding a puzzle piece that perfectly fits. Your body sees organs as invaders, but plasma is more easily accepted. Even with a perfect match, your body might still fight the new organ a little. Anti-rejection drugs help your body get used to the new organ to prevent it from attack...
Read more