I disagree with Hatchetman that home scanning quality is not good enough. Look in the gallery and a majority of what you look at are home-scanned negatives. This isn't the place to discuss it (that would be over at dpug.org), but there are a lot of people here, myself included, who go this route. I do it this way because I can, but I hate it because I have been a software developer, chained to a computer for 8 hours a day, for the last 30 years.
I just printed this one at 13x19 (from expired fuji 800 left in Laostyle17's uncle's camera in 2004) and it is gorgeous: http://www.apug.org/gallery1/showima...mageuser=57747 Sorry, you can't see it without a subscription.
Are you shooting color or B&W? If B&W, you can process the film yourself for about a total of a dollar a roll. The equipment costs about what you paid for that one batch of processing. It's easy as pie, too. The only darkness you need can be found inside a black bag that looks like a sweatshirt with a zipped bottom and no neck opening. You use this for loading the film into the processing canister. All the rest you can do with lights on in the bathroom, kitchen, or laundry. Color is not much more expensive than that, maybe $2.00. But it is a bit more complicated and takes much more precision in keeping the chemicals at certain temperatures during processing.
Once you have your negatives, you just scan and have at it.