What if "what we see" is not accurate of how it actually looks and works? I think the math behind it would have a more accurate way to describe how it looks and works, which is what the render does.
Well it depends on the viewing distance of course. With a telescope you can only (barely) image the accretion disk, if the BH is not too far and not shrouded by dust. So it's more of an artistic perspective, but accurate rendition :)
