My guess is that you haven't really seen a total solar eclipse then. There is no comparison between any partial eclipse and a total eclipse where the sun's corona becomes visible. None! As far as I'm concerned 99.9% is pretty close to zero as far as eclipses go. I suppose it's mildly interesting the first two of three times you experience it, but that's it, for me anyway. At 90%, most people wouldn't even know there was an eclipse occurring if they hadn't been told of it beforehand. Maybe at 95% the animals start to notice that something strange is happening, but it's really no darker than on a cloudy day, and you certainly cannot look directly at the sun even a second before or after totality. During totality, the sun (or it's corona really) gives off about as much light as a full moon; and anyone who wants to take pictures of the total eclipse is advised to practice on the full moon two weeks before the eclipse. (But don't try to take pictures before or after totality without a solar filter as it will likely destroy your camera.)
ML/NJ
I just went to look up this eclipse, and it isn’t even a total eclipse. It is an “annular” eclipse which means that the moon is sufficiently far away from the earth that it’s apparent disc size viewed from the earth is smaller than that of the sun. At maximum eclipse the sun will appear as a ring of light. There will be no solar corona. There will be NO time when one can safely look directly at the sun, and NO time when it is advisable to take photographs without a filter. There will be NO time with this eclipse when the sun’s brightness dips to that of a full moon.