Looking at the original pictures posted, and comparing them to Chris Crawford's edited versions of those pictures, it's obvious that the lab didn't print the negatives to their full capacity.

Ian Grant's account of safety versus quality hits the head on the nail.

What you can do, when it comes to having your lab developing your film, is to interview them. Ask them what chemistry they use, and how long they would normally process the FP4+ film. When you know that, you have at least one constant in your process. Then, exposure is entirely under your control. FP4+ has quite a bit of tolerance for exposure differences, but I would send them a test roll, where you bracket your exposures in normal contrast lighting. This way you can know more what to expect from them after they print all the versions. It's basically the only control you have when you send film to a lab. It will never be perfect until you find someone, usually charging a lot more, that pays attention to every frame they print. The extra money usually goes to cover the cost of all the prints that didn't turn out well.

Or, like others have suggested, you can do it at home on your own, because that allows you processing control as well.