Is printing to metal a good choice for wildlife?

This is the first time I will be using Bay Photo to print my bird picture on metal.
I have read everything I can on the subject and still have questions?
1. Not sure if I should print to canvas or metal for wildlife?
2. High Gloss, Mid-Gloss, Satin, Sheer Glossy, Sheer Satin, & Textured
3. Which is better a floating back which pulls the picture from the wall or just wire hang it?
4. I was thinking of going with the rounded corners and no frame?
I have attached a photo of what I’m thinking of printing.
Like to hear your thoughts and advise

I'm not coming to Florida in the foreseeable future. I managed, temporarily, to get my 18" x 3" photo printed out at home, but I had to reinstall the software due to getting a different computer in the meantime. I hadn't printed anything in months. The print is relatively tiny, but looks nice. There's a print/sign shop a few miles from work. I'll check with them to see what they have available...could never get my pic divided into 3 sections, which is a bit frustrating. I don't need a 10-foot long picture of a bridge.

How did they turn out, and where did you have them done?

I went to SFO over spring break to see my grand niece and took a few tours of the area. I got only ONE decent pic of the Golden Gate Bridge and I's like to get it printed, but if I used my printer, the best I'd be able to do would be 18x4". Googling, I closest match I found was that M-pix has a 5x30 paper print available (don't think it's available in metal), but I didn't check the price and I've never used them before. Opinions/suggestions?

In your test shot you exposed the JPEG and the raw file the same. Right there is a potential difference of some consequence. Look at the illustration below of a flowering fruit tree (Canon G7). The camera JPEG is on the left. It's nuked to hell -- wastebasket fodder. But the raw file highlights were not blown out. I set an optimal exposure for the sensor and exposed the sensor to capacity. It's camera make/model specific but for most cameras to get a good JPEG you have to set an exposure than under utilizes the sensor. About how much do you think in the flower photo below? One stop? That's 1/2 the capacity of the sensor.

Look at the second illustration of the pond in the park (Fuji X-T2). Shooting & processing raw lets me take photos you can't take at all shooting JPEG. Same situation as the flowering tree in terms of exposure. The camera JPEG is nuked when the raw file was exposed to fully utilize the sensor. To get a good JPEG with that camera I would have had to reduce exposure -- that reduces SNR and that reduces IQ.

I did something else that you can't do at all shooting JPEG. It's mostly overcast and the foreground is in overcast light but there's blue sky visible. That's two different white balances and so I set two different white balances in separate parts of the photo. You won't find that in your camera's menu.

And that's barely just the beginning.

I generally think about composition rules constantly going on in my mind when I am doing landscapes. I have the grid lines always on my viewfinder for the rule of thirds. When doing landscapes I fill the frame with what I want in the final image.
When doing wildlife I concentrate more on getting the main subject in focus and properly exposed.
It is good to review the rules of composition once in a while but no rules are cast in stone. The best you can do is work on them every time you are out shooting. I like to shoot a scene several different ways, from the top, down low, to the right and left, etc. You sometimes do not know the best angle until you look at all your shots later.
Always take more shots than you planed on.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end. And remember my favorite rule, KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID.
I do love leading lines, I look for it whenever possible. I also love foreground background shots.