I imagine it has to do with how long ago you went to school. I remember learning that red, yellow, and blue were the primary colors, but that was back when TVs were black-and-white.
For me the RYB model just seems more intuitive. It just feels natural that green would be a bluish-yellow. It still seems odd that red and green can be combined at all, much less produce a pure yellow.
> For me the RYB model just seems more intuitive. It just feels natural that green would be a bluish-yellow. It still seems odd that red and green can be combined at all, much less produce a pure yellow.
But that's just what the CMY(K) model says. The CMY(K) model is the meaningful one in everyday life. In actual reality, with human eyes observing physical light filtered by pigments, blue is just cyan with a little magenta in it, and red is just magenta with a little yellow in it. The truth is, in the real world, you will never be able to make cyan or magenta if all you have is yellow, red and blue paint. But you will be able to make red or blue if you have yellow, magenta and cyan paint.
I think this might just be a case of people insisting to use less precise but more familiar names for colours, maybe. Maybe in English "cyan" and "magenta" sound like strange colours while blue and red sound more familiar and comforting. But insisting on using blue instead of cyan actually restricts your ability to draw colours.
For me the RYB model just seems more intuitive. It just feels natural that green would be a bluish-yellow. It still seems odd that red and green can be combined at all, much less produce a pure yellow.