Whether people like it, hate it or remain neutral, it seems that everyone now knows the meaning of “post network”, but can’t express it accurately. “When I see it, I know it” — it’s like porn, right? This is not a bad analogy, since the post-web art is what pornography does to sex – to show it in a flashy and vulgar way. The definition that I want to propose highlights the sensitivity of this process: when I see the art of creating a lens for a device or an installation lens for art, I know the post-internet art. Network after art is something that looks good on the Internet: in pure white gallery space, in the bright light photo (large white area of the browser window doubled this effect), for high contrast and color filter. Timur si-qin’s works “Selectional Display: Tomato Quadra” (2013) Supporters of post-internet art may say that what really matters is not the gallery, but the lens of the work, like the scene in the photographer’s studio. Photography, however, often masks or changes the environment. Post – network art maintains white space to use its influence. Supporters may also say that online art has criticized the way images are spread online to serve the art market. But unless the artist does something to make the record seem odd, or to emphasize the difference between the line and the line, it is hard to believe that there is a critical element in it.