Is there a difference in the way that film can be processed?

i.e. Can I pay more to get the negatives processed better?

If so is there anywhere that any film types recommend to get films developed?

Thanks

Well, you've more or less got kinda 2 and a half choices.
Use somewhere on the highstreet, where the film gets fed into a machine, and then developed neg and prints pop out the other end.
There may or may not be someone stood watching. This is your cheapest option.
Pay a pro lab to develop it. For me, this usually takes a week and I know that it's done by hand. The results are, I feel, better for it. But it's not cheap.
Or you can put the film in the post to either one of those two options.

If I'm processing something that's important, then I'll go with the pro option. In fact, some of my B&W stock needs that anyway as nowhere on the high street does it (apart from Boots, IIRC, but that's more or less mail order).
The scans I get from the pro lab are of a better quality than the high street, certainly.

As far as prices go, I use a couple of places.
One local Truprint store - 24hr service, prints & CD is about £6-7, IIRC.
An independent place in a nearby town - 1hr service, no prints, CD - £4.99
Pro lab - 5 days, dev and scan, £14.99.

As an aside, I seen hi-res scans from negs developed on the high street next to ones done in the pro lab, and there's really not much in it.
The quality of the scans they each provide, however, is vastly different.

Certainly my biggest beef with general high-street and mail delivered developing and printing has been the cropping. I recall specifically a set of pictures from Max Speilman where a statue was shown on the negative with a clear space above its head and yet the photo had been cropped through the middle of the face. This is one of the worst examples, but I have had cropped prints from Boots, Dixons and others.

Back when film was still king, I was told of a company that would hand print everything properly and although you would pay for it, good results (from your efforts of course) were pretty much guaranteed. I never used them as I was just starting in digital myself.

So for the best/cheapest option I'd be better off getting them developed at a Jesops/Boots type place and then if there are any negs that I wan better quality prints of then take them somewhere pro?

i.e. the difference is in the printing not in the fixing of the negatives?

I'm about to send some off to TruPrint, as per Mr. Small's recomendation.

I would say that's a fair option. At least you get to see if the prints worked out and have potential before you blow cash on getting them done properly.

Let's say that you only wanted a couple blown up anyway, at least they would be the two worth doing and when you factor in the cost of doing two enlargements, compared to getting them all done professionally, then I guess it wouldn't be too bad.

My sister rates Snappy Snaps for their processing. I’ve not tried them myself, but she’s happy with their results - she can be quite picky about such things.

Be wary of Jessops, hanging around with the purple one and her friends I've learnt that they wreck a lot of film, on more than a few occasions I've heard grumbling about scratches on the negs and other things going wrong in the development process which leaves the negs poor for printing.

As a rule, I steer clear of Jessops unless it's an emergency.
I overheard two of the sales staff in the local store discussing the 4/3 format, as in 'It doesn't make any sense, surely you can't get higher than three thirds? What's the fourth third?'
Avoid.

Well, I picked them up today and they're really good

I've put some of them on to flickr (see my new shiny sig )

The prints weren't as good as the CD copies though (surprisingly).

So, something you'll be doing more of, do you think?

Definitely!

I've still got 3 rolls of Fujifilm Pro 160 S remaining and 3 rolls of Kodak 200iso stuff aswell

I love the anticipation you get from using film!

My DSLR will remain my weapon of choice though

May I recommend Kodak Ektar 100? It's just teh sex. I'm liking Fuji Reala 100 as well at the moment.
But I do love the Ektar. Some of that in a medium format camera... I'm sorry I'm going to have to stop typing while I think about that...