The top one is tolerable the bottom one is fugly. I wouldn't even want it in the same room with my collection.
Oil slick in a puddle following a rainstorm comes to mind. Sort of like the garishly painted Elgin Marbles......
If I were writing the auction catalog for those two coins, I'd call the first "ugly" and the second one "hideous."
Don't get too attached to the top coin. It's not good. Given the base grade, which is EF-AU, you shouldn't get hurt of you pay a fair price for it, but that kind of color on an Mint State coin that is called a "monster toner" is a trap. The color is not natural.
I can understand a modest increase that toning brings to a coin. The prices I've seen on some toners is crazy It's an 1889. I just hope it's not a Carson City! Somebody ruined that coin.
I feel as though most or all of this would better pertain to the lower coin than the upper coin. The toning in the first example looks remarkably legit to me and it's a coin I'd be happy to own, no matter what anyone else has to say about it. Horses for Courses, as they say.