Architectural visualization and Architectural photography are very similar. Creating an interior rendering is basically shooting an architectural photograph of an interior. The only real difference is that in the case of the rendering, the artist is building (digitally) the space and the objects in it. Both artist and photographer light the scene and stage it to create a visually appealing image. Both need to understand light and form in order to bring out the subtle and essential details in the design.
These days photographers are more digital artists than photographers. Taking as many as thirty shots of the same view, in order to composite them together in post production. The photographer is spending more time "creating" the image than "capturing" it. There is no right or wrong to this approach, however there is something to be said for being able to get the shot right "in camera". This means that little post production work is needed other than basic image adjustments similar to what one would do in a dark room.
Rendering too can sometimes rely heavily on post production work to create the image. In some cases this approach can be quicker, however it often locks the artist into one view. In many cases trying to change the view during the revision process can mean essentially starting over. Getting the rendering right in the render engine is not unlike getting the photograph right in camera. A new angle means placing a new camera and generating a new render, but knowing it will turn out identical in feel and look to the original means that there will be less work in post production.
Below is another image showing a featured piece from the collection.