One of the commonest questions asked on photography newsgroups is "Where can I take nude photos for processing?". In Britain, the simple and unequivocal answer is "Anywhere"!

The Post Office Acts prohibit sending obscene or indecent material through the post. So, if you are taking shots intended to end up in the "Readers' Wives" section of a soft-porn magazine, some processors might ask you to collect the results in person. But naturist material does not fall within these legal definitions. This has been tested in court as recently as 1998 - the Tower Productions case. A naturist photographer really does not need a firm advertising "discreet" or "confidential" services, particularly as these are often at premium rates. And if you are concerned that the lab will make some spare copies for their own delectation, then that's a risk with any processor, but - relatively speaking - much less of a risk with a large company that handles thousands of films per day and many millions of images per year. Any lab technician will be able to tell stories of discovering pictures that (probably) were never intended to be seen by anyone but the photographer. Naturist nudity is very tame in comparison, and most unlikely to attract predatory interest.

Where a company offering a specifically naturist processing service might score is that the advertised service often includes a full assessment of the results, with expert advice on how to improve one's technique.

So, why not simply take your film to the nearest 1-hour minilab? The simple answer is that in photographic processing, as in so many areas, you get more or less what you pay for. Minilabs are great for rapid, standardised processing. They are unlikely to do a really bad job, but are also unlikely to do an excellent one. If the snaps you've taken are only "here's the beach - it's the yellow thing at the bottom, with the greeny-blue sea below it and the blue sky above" then find the cheapest minilab and collect the vouchers for a free album or free film that's been kept baking in a special-offer bin outside the front door. But if you want the flesh tones to look real, if you want to minimise the tiny scratches and blemishes which mar too many prints, then pay extra and send or take your film to a lab that offers "individual print assessment" or similar services. A print by such a lab will normally knock spots off a high-street offering - sometimes literally.

There is an obvious alternative - DIY. Home processing isn't particularly difficult, just time consuming and - unless you do a lot - not much cheaper than paying a lab to do it. If you've got somewhere clean with running water, electricity, a square metre or so of workspace and doors and windows which can be light-sealed easily then do consider setting up a home darkroom. It's good fun, and the larger the enlargements then the greater the saving over a commercial lab.

Finally, don't forget digital photography. The latest cameras are a fraction of the prices seen only a year or two back, but with much superior specifications. If you aren't ready to abandon film just yet, then consider investing in a scanner. Just have your films developed only (no prints, or maybe just an index print), scan the whole roll into your computer, do your own cropping, colour balance adjustment, spotting and horizon-levelling, then print out exactly the size and shape of print you want on one of the super-cheap but extremely good quality printers available for £100 or even less in any high-street computer shop. Again, the bigger the final print, the bigger the saving.