/ic/, is it just me or half of the color wheel completely lacks

It's called the visible spectrum. That's all you get with your shitty human eyes m8.

Your confusion might just be that the Photoshop color wheel has two black corners which is completely useless, and the ideal one would have three corners.
But a square looks better from a design perspective.

protip: left half of the wheel contains of warm colors

>>2382966
I get what you mean. Cyan is pretty much completely ignored by older literature on color and just lumped in with blue or green, and apparently that's a language thing. The distinction between blue and green is apparently the last one to occur in developing languages, and just having a different name has an effect on how we perceive color.

I don't really have much trouble with my blues/greens, just understanding where they lie on the color wheel in relation to other colors has been incredibly helpful for me.

It might be because, getting cosistent blue and green hues was quite hard before synthectic pigments, so we dont have big enough visual memory attunment to them.

but yeah one third of color wheel kinda sucks, thats why we use them in contrast with more baddass colors to make them look even more baddass.

>>2382980
It's about the wheel, not the box, stupid.

>pink
idk man isn't pink just light red

>>2382966

"Pink" is just a desaturated red, bruh.

>>2383224
>In optics, pink can refer to any of the colors between bluish red (purple) and red, of medium to high brightness and of low to moderate saturation. Although pink is generally considered a tint of red, most variations of pink lie between red, white and magenta colors. This means that the pink's hue is between red and magenta.
OP switched pink and magenta around, by the way.
Thing is just that the traditional painter's wheel is slightly different to what we agree to be the subtractive colour model now, with as result that definitions get a bit wonky. There's simply no way you can traditionally mix a colour like pure magenta or hot pink by mixing blues, reds and yellows with white/black, the gamut is just too narrow. The same goes for cyan and electric yellow (which is why the CMYK printing model was originally developed as workaround).
Basically, if you're struggling with colour theory, realize that in artistic history they simply had the primary colours wrong up until recently, but managed perfectly fine painting naturally looking scenes with what they did have. That, and paint doesn't behave 'perfectly' in sync with what a physics book would tell you, so if it ain't broken, etc etc

>>2383677
>Basically, if you're struggling with colour theory, realize that in artistic history they simply had the primary colours wrong up until recently, but managed perfectly fine painting naturally looking scenes with what they did have. That, and paint doesn't behave 'perfectly' in sync with what a physics book would tell you, so if it ain't broken, etc etc
That doesn't explain the lack of blue words.
Unless the blue/green spectrum is actually smaller, but is represented with a bigger width for completing the wheel symmetrically.

technically magenta doesn't actually exist

it's always red and blue light at the same time

>>2382980
There is some logic to it, you have desatured vs saturated darks on the different sides.

>>2383762
>That doesn't explain the lack of blue words.
It's a language thing. As I mentioned before, the last major color distinction developed in languages is blue/green(until like WWII Japan didn't even have words to separate green form blue). But, at least in english, there are plenty of words for shades of blue/cyan, so the deficiency is not linguistic, it's in your knowledge. Educate thyself.