So the science of color is actually pretty weird. It doesn't behave as simply as you think.
Color behaves differently depending on how it's made. For instance, mixing all the paint (pigment, subtractive) together will make black, but mixing all the light together (light, additive) will make white. Pantone deals with pigments, and RGB deals with light. They're so different that there some colors are only available in light (RGB) that don't exist in pigments (Pantone).
(Without getting too into it, that's actually why cartoons nowadays are so much more vibrant and brighter. Everything is now made with RGB tools for RGB screens, and we skip the pigment stage from when things were painted on paper.)
Think of it like asking why there isn't a direct conversion between gallons and pounds. They both seem to measure the same thing at a glance, but they're actually different.
TenLongFingers t1_j1w3vq3 wrote
Reply to ELI5: How is that Pantone colors don't have direct RGB counterparts? by ExternalUserError
So the science of color is actually pretty weird. It doesn't behave as simply as you think.
Color behaves differently depending on how it's made. For instance, mixing all the paint (pigment, subtractive) together will make black, but mixing all the light together (light, additive) will make white. Pantone deals with pigments, and RGB deals with light. They're so different that there some colors are only available in light (RGB) that don't exist in pigments (Pantone).
(Without getting too into it, that's actually why cartoons nowadays are so much more vibrant and brighter. Everything is now made with RGB tools for RGB screens, and we skip the pigment stage from when things were painted on paper.)
Think of it like asking why there isn't a direct conversion between gallons and pounds. They both seem to measure the same thing at a glance, but they're actually different.