Tim Brook multimedia artist

Colour

critical confusions

To view this webpage, install the Java plugin.

Click the controls  as you read the text

Why art critics confuse complementary colours

I was puzzled recently by an art critic’s confident assertion that red and green are complementary—he was pointing to a red something like   and a green something like  . I decided to investigate. I now have some clues about the cause of his confusion.

People have been using the colour wheel for a long time. For example, Newton had produced a colour wheel by the early 1700s and Goethe painted one in the 1800s. As far as I can tell from reproductions, Goethe’s was remarkably accurate considering the limitations of the technology available to him. It included six colours, which were reasonably similar in hue but darker and less saturated than those in my illustrations.   He did not use the colour names that I use in these notes. 

Early versions of the colour wheel were frequently mentioned in textbooks that used monochrome illustrations and described the colours in words. It became usual to label magenta as red and cyan as blue, so the subtractive primaries cyan, magenta and yellow became blue, red and yellow. Similarly, the complementary pairs red-cyan, green-magenta and blue-yellow became orange-blue, green-red and violet-yellow.

Having different names for the correct hues would not have mattered but…  

  1. Goethe, J.W.v., 1840. Theory of colours, London
    (Translated from Zur Farbenlehre by Eastlake, C.L.)
  2. Itten, J., 1961. The art of color: the subjective experience and objective rationale of color, Reinhold Publishing Corp, New York, USA
  3. Newton, I.S., 1704. Opticks: or, A treatise of the reflexions, refractions, inflexions and colours of light, Sam. Smith & Benj. Walford, London