I wonder

Most of what you see are "false color" images, though, usually the telescopes and instruments don't even see in the range that the human eye sees. Doesn't mean it isn't "real" though. And like @AlphaPuppy says, our galaxy isn't such a huge problem because we can actually see it clearly and closest around us; so it's just a matter of mapping it differently. Still, I wish more of the celestial pictures which fall in that particular category would come with a clear "Artist's Rendition" warning, because a LOT of stuff passed around are just that, too.

You can digitally map something from the inside and create a visual three dimensional rendering, not saying that's what happened, just saying

Milky Way from Earth looks like this (Multi-photo collage, though). You can use that, or extrapolate/simulate from it how it looks from outside (Of course, further observations have already mapped the various arms of it etc.).

You are giving too much credit to digital technology, celestial photography was achieved with optical and radio telescopes.
It has been a culmination of many recorded images from venerable and accredited observatories worldwide

What you see in those pictures are just a band of light consisting of a few billion planets. But it's still very cool.

Look, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_galaxies_of_the_Milky_Way